Welcome to Close Combat Series
  Login or Register Home  ·  Downloads  ·  Forums  ·  Combat Camera  ·  Help  

  Survey
Do incapacitations count as a soldier's kills?

Yes
No



Results
Polls

Votes 1179
Comments: 1

  Shout Box!!

Only registered users can shout. Please login or create an account.

  Main Menu
Articles & News  
    Help
    Player`s News
    Site News
    Multiplayer
    Terrain Challenge
    Boot Camp
Community  
    Forums
    Downloads
    Combat Camera
    MOOXE @ Youtube
    Statistics
Members  
    Private Messages
    Your Account
    Logout

  Donations
Anonymous - $25.00
08/15/2022

Anonymous - $25.00
08/15/2022

Anonymous - $25.00
12/18/2021

Anonymous - $100.00
11/08/2021

Anonymous - $15.00
04/09/2021

Anonymous - $100.00
04/05/2021

Anonymous - $20.00
02/20/2021

Anonymous - $10.00
12/29/2020

Anonymous - $1.00
11/06/2020

ZAPPI4 - $20.00
10/10/2020

Find our site useful? Make a small donation to show your support.



Search for at
Close Combat Series Advanced Search


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 Author
Message
 
tripwire

Rep: 37.5
votes: 2


PostPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2009 1:49 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Very, very well explained, Stalky. Your use of the English language is clear for any really technically inclined person to understand. I am a relative novice at CC modding... and it makes perfect sense to me. Thank you.

I usually wait for "new" products to be tested by the die-hards. This was (and still is) a good case for this attitude of mine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
AT_Stalky

Rep: 27.4
votes: 10


PostPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:32 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanx Men

Anyway ID your idea is v good, and its just to code according to my instruction and one see how the "WaR LOS BUG" will go away, as there is no such BUG, its come from the maps in WaR is WRONGFULLY coded..

I have here now recoded all houses this map "Butgnbch.txt", and its a 10 minutes work, so its not done like it was a product I was selling for money... Its fixed up Just to prove a point.

Backup yer old "Butgnbch.txt" and replace it with this file in yer marix games/Close Combat Wacht am Rhein/maps folder. And anyone can see how the "los" bug is gone.

Notice its a fast work, and non of the other errors in the map is fixed just the houses. And that house below the Lumber yard is coded as a green house, Just righclick over the walls and oull see its glass all over.

Here is the file, (its a new file now, i have put another 10 min into it)
http://www.closecombatseries.net/Hosted/at_stalky/images/Butgnbch.zip

Try it

If I have time I will make a new elements file to, just to prove a point (and as they having so hard time understand my english) that the windows can be made either not look through at all, or fully look through, or any other level one whant to, and how the LOS blocking accumilates etc, if a unit is just outside a bilding and another another is just opposit building one can get los with this element file and even with correct coded maps, thats as it shold be (with the setting current in the WaR element file that is), and if one dont whant that one need no interial walls to stop that one just set another value in the elemts file for the windows and make window less see through. BUT one MUST CODE right (as i have explained) or ITS AS NO ELEMENTS IS THERE AT ALL and LOS go right through, cover, protection and movment penalty dont work either etc, and one see right through buildings as the building is not there at all. All my images should give a clear picture about that i hope..... But more of that later, first they have to understand the coding.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
schrecken

Rep: 195
votes: 15


PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:02 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

You would think that WaR maps had been coded in a new and unrealistic way compared to the way all Close Combat maps had been coded.

I just checked a few maps and the coding seems fine and suitable for the intended purpose.

Although in theory stalky has it almost right, there are a lot of other contributing factors in coding a map... size of the graphic/size of the building/type of building/position of the building etc etc.

The building must be coded large enough to hold a team of men and the coded walls can't extend (too far) outside the building.

If we were to make cookie cutter stamps of each building they would become boring to play and not play at all realistically.... I want to have LOS through windows for instance, not windows that block LOS as stalky suggests.

Thats not to say there may be errors... 64 maps is huge, if you would like to point out anything that is particularly worrisome I'll be glad to take a look.

cheers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website GameRanger Account
 
AT_Stalky

Rep: 27.4
votes: 10


PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:15 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm
'
Here is a building with Windows ALL around, and its a no see through...
So IF YOU WHANT SEE THROUGH of windows mate, you SHOULD SHANGE THAT in THE ELEMENTS FILE mate, Smile Thats not the same as the missing elements the current WaR maps has in its houses that cause the see through even SOLDID WALLS. (shall I code that in yer way with the gaps and take some pic and post it just to prove my point?).


One more time mate, the elemenst are ROUND ok, you MUST code as Atomic made it..

I will try recode (in the Atomic way) one of the sadest coded maps in WaR, and have it ready tn or tm.

And Schrecken, I can offer you, to recode say 10 maps for free. If ya whant to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
platoon_michael

Rep: 47.6
votes: 25


PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:37 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

This topic is now a thread at Matirx Stalky.(but u probably already knew that)
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2056957

Your only going to do 10 maps for free?
If you can tell me how to get 5CC to display the elements like 3C does I will do 10 more.(just send me your list of 10 so I dont do the same ones)
that will give us 20.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message GameRanger Account
 
AT_Stalky

Rep: 27.4
votes: 10


PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 11:00 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

I wich i had more time so I can offer more maps, but I have other project running, and it would not be fair to em. And family, etc.

And about 5CC, you have the latest version? Contanc me over my mail and I hint how to set it for WaR.
And U have a PM.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
Tejszd

Rep: 133.6
votes: 19


PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:01 am Post subject: Reply with quote

Great presentation AT_Stalky!

Definitely SOME maps have coding issues with buildings. The stock maps reused should be pretty good except for maybe buildings in expanded areas. The new maps seem to be a mixed bag with some looking right and others wrong.

Thanks for fixing some of them, look forward to downloading and playing on your updated maps....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
AT_Stalky

Rep: 27.4
votes: 10


PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 12:52 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeh
Some of the CC4 maps in WaR as dasburg is not changed from Atomic code so that map look perfect at first glance..
Unfortunately Some of the CC4 maps in WaR had changes in em, and they need recode, but, all the new made maps need recode.

This map I put maybe 25 minutes into (suppose it need as much more time making the small stuff)
We are talking of what? 21 new maps times maybe 1 hour each, and then just scheck up the CC4 maps that has been alterd in WaR, that’s maybe like 30 minutes each. Thats some 40 houers of work..

And then a dbl sheck by someone (another 20 houres maybe). I don’t think that’s to much effort to put in to make movement time work, LOS and protection, and cover work good.

I have offer to recode 10 maps… ??

Here is this recoded maps file: http://www.closecombatseries.net/Hosted/at_stalky/images/Lutrmnge.zip
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
squadleader_id

Rep: 53.2
votes: 7


PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 1:37 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice work, Stalky!

One more thing...I think the CCWAR elements.txt file needs to be re-checked for anomalies.
I discovered this when discussing 'your thread' at the Matrix forum:
Quote:
About the mystery of that ghostly see-thru Stavelot factory...you guys might want to take a closer look at the elements.txt file.
Eventhough Schrecken...err...Andrew pointed out that the factory has flimsy walls...it should still be a LOS/LOF obstruction but with low protection values.
Look for "Factory Wall" (column A, row 234 - or 237 in the Workbook), check "Visibility Hindrance" columns (KLMN)...notice that they're set at low values of 100 (same hindrance value as doors, and even lower than windows). Change those values to basic "wall" values of 450...and you should still get flimsy Factory Walls but not see-thru anymore.


http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2056957
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
AT_Stalky

Rep: 27.4
votes: 10


PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:17 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes

Yep ID, the factory wall element in elements file in WaR has a see through value of 100, and as a wall it shold had a value of 300-450, so no wonder one see right through that building, and yes 100 is lower then values for a glass window, so its more easy see through that wall then a see through the windows.. So yes, that must be corrected in the elemts file. Your right Sir.

You fined a similar "anomletys" in the Factory Floor value in the elemnt file, 20-00-00-00 but maybe it shold have been something like 30-20-20-20 so LOS acc dont work with that either. So its a bouble issue in that i guess.
Oh, and also the los acc is turned of in Wall/Window Factory elements, that must be turned on for any of this to work.

(non of this has anything to do with the wrong coded map, this is s seperate issue as i said in secon post at top of this page)


I try make a new recoded map before bed.


Last edited by AT_Stalky on Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
Pzt_Serk

Rep: 8.7


PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:38 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Stalky,

keep up the good work with maps. Just had a good laugh at the invisible houses lol.

I also just had a shreck team spotted right away in a forest while on ambush mode far from the ennemy...and my general feeling is that cover (concealment) is close to non-existent.so I was wondering if you could also take a look at it.

Infantry is spotted as soon as it moves, even if its a crawl. It makes infantry movement and advance very difficult if not impossible.

Maybe make a comparison with trsm data??

Cheers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
RD_Oddball




PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:40 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

First off thank you for your offer to recode the maps.

Actually there is no right or wrong answer to this problem since with every solution any of us viewing this thread can possibly come up with there is a trade-off. I accept that your presentation is viewed as right in your mind because you are willing to accept the consequences of the trade-offs. Fair enough. We all have different standards. We too are concerned with the LOS issues you point out. That can be agreed upon. You make some good points that were considered early in the WaR development process hence the coding style guide Schrecken created for map coders. Which I'd mention his style guide is not that far off your proposed solution. As Schrecken said, yes some mistakes were made and that style guide was not always followed for whatever reason. And I'd add that no amount of testing would uncover every last bug in the game. Even seemingly obvious bugs. There'll always be some that slip by despite our best efforts. That's why patches are made. We'll definitely take your suggestions to heart and factor them into the decision making process as we go.

To address your solution directly:
First the problem with tiles meeting at corners allowing clear LOS between them is inherent to the game engine and has always been there. It's an issue with nearly every game system that utilizes a cell based system. Even hex based games have the same issues. Sure there are work arounds and we feel the style guide Schrecken made was an acceptable solution when it was followed. I'll react to your suggested workaround and why it's not ideal or pefect or even the only solution.

The problem with coding walls double tile elements thick is that they now do not match up with the BGM graphics. Since the BGM is the only decent feedback the player gets about the coding environment in my mind that's a negative trade-off with your solution. Sure a player can right-click an element to see why they can't see through what looks like an unimpeded area but not reasonable to expect in the heat of battle. Agreed, it's just as much problem as being able to see through buildings. Yes maps can be drawn larger but that leads to my next point.

Game scale. I'll admit it's less of a concern since it's aesthetic and not about game function but it does appear as a mistake when coding is done as you're suggesting. If walls are coded double element tiles wide they now 4m thick by game scale (5px/m if one is to draw an LOS line you'll recall the distance in meters is displayed next to it. If you do a test you'll see that is 5px/meter). So now instead of walls being closer to reality (8" thick is architectural standard nowdays back then it was likely wider. We can round up to 30.55cm) they are now out of scale with game engine scale. To accomodate the larger map scale to accomodate your thicker walls soldier animations would have to be redrawn so they are 18 element tiles tall, vehicles would have to be made to be the same scale (10px=13cm < that's centimeters not meters) and so on down the line. This would mean, if my math is correct, that a 4800px square map would represent an area 624m square. Far too small. Making larger maps would tax computer system resources on slower computers. Not to mention the game engine scale would have to be reprogrammed likely causing an entirely new set of problems that would take years to debug. Not a reasonable expectation within the scope of a rerelease project.

So as you can see there are trade-offs to every issue, ones we thoughtfully considered and no perfect, absolute answers.

If any of this needs further clarification I'll be glad to. Please ask.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
AT_Stalky

Rep: 27.4
votes: 10


PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 6:34 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

RD_Oddball wrote:
First off thank you for your offer to recode the maps.

Actually there is no right or wrong answer to this problem since with every solution any of us viewing this thread can possibly come up with there is a trade-off. I accept that your presentation is viewed as right in your mind because you are willing to accept the consequences of the trade-offs. Fair enough. We all have different standards. We too are concerned with the LOS issues you point out. That can be agreed upon. You make some good points that were considered early in the WaR development process hence the coding style guide Schrecken created for map coders. Which I'd mention his style guide is not that far off your proposed solution. As Schrecken said, yes some mistakes were made and that style guide was not always followed for whatever reason. And I'd add that no amount of testing would uncover every last bug in the game. Even seemingly obvious bugs. There'll always be some that slip by despite our best efforts. That's why patches are made. We'll definitely take your suggestions to heart and factor them into the decision making process as we go.

To address your solution directly:
First the problem with tiles meeting at corners allowing clear LOS between them is inherent to the game engine and has always been there. It's an issue with nearly every game system that utilizes a cell based system. Even hex based games have the same issues. Sure there are work arounds and we feel the style guide Schrecken made was an acceptable solution when it was followed. I'll react to your suggested workaround and why it's not ideal or pefect or even the only solution.

The problem with coding walls double tile elements thick is that they now do not match up with the BGM graphics. Since the BGM is the only decent feedback the player gets about the coding environment in my mind that's a negative trade-off with your solution. Sure a player can right-click an element to see why they can't see through what looks like an unimpeded area but not reasonable to expect in the heat of battle. Agreed, it's just as much problem as being able to see through buildings. Yes maps can be drawn larger but that leads to my next point.

Game scale. I'll admit it's less of a concern since it's aesthetic and not about game function but it does appear as a mistake when coding is done as you're suggesting. If walls are coded double element tiles wide they now 4m thick by game scale (5px/m if one is to draw an LOS line you'll recall the distance in meters is displayed next to it. If you do a test you'll see that is 5px/meter). So now instead of walls being closer to reality (8" thick is architectural standard nowdays back then it was likely wider. We can round up to 30.55cm) they are now out of scale with game engine scale. To accomodate the larger map scale to accomodate your thicker walls soldier animations would have to be redrawn so they are 18 element tiles tall, vehicles would have to be made to be the same scale (10px=13cm < that's centimeters not meters) and so on down the line. This would mean, if my math is correct, that a 4800px square map would represent an area 624m square. Far too small. Making larger maps would tax computer system resources on slower computers. Not to mention the game engine scale would have to be reprogrammed likely causing an entirely new set of problems that would take years to debug. Not a reasonable expectation within the scope of a rerelease project.

So as you can see there are trade-offs to every issue, ones we thoughtfully considered and no perfect, absolute answers.

If any of this needs further clarification I'll be glad to. Please ask.



Quote:
The problem with coding walls double tile elements thick is that they now do not match up with the BGM graphics. Since the BGM is the only decent feedback the player gets about the coding environment in my mind that's a negative trade-off with your solution. Sure a player can right-click an element to see why they can't see through what looks like an unimpeded area but not reasonable to expect in the heat of battle. Agreed, it's just as much problem as being able to see through buildings. Yes maps can be drawn larger but that leads to my next point.


Yeh ofcose, its so trubblesome, nevermind that the map Code in ALL Atomic CC4 and ALL CC5 map codes was done in that way, and ohh how we sufferd when playing them lousy games, they truly sucked...... Wink


Quote:
So as you can see there are trade-offs to every issue, ones we thoughtfully considered and no perfect, absolute answers.

If any of this needs further clarification I'll be glad to. Please ask.
yeh,

Smile

Tradeoffs, right, Smile And done in yer way we have to live with some nice
tradeoffs yep,
Another bad trade off with yer code is that LOS get between them
elements, but who cares, right, thats a accepteble tradeoff you think?
And another trade of with yer code is that movement time penalty dont
work as soldier move between the elements, but who cares its another tradeoff you think is ok, right?
And ofcose neither cover or protection works with that way you code, but
who cares, its another of thouse tradeoffs one have to make, right...

No, the way of code I have described Jim, its not my way of code really, its the right way to code, and its the ATOMIC way to code mate, so the talk of double wall etc is just utter nonsense.


All the CC4 maps are coded in this way mate all CC5 maps to, and even most of yer CC4 maps YOU HAVE IN WAR is coded in this way, Wink , so if this isn’t right and the "double wall" is a problem, THEN YOU BETTER RECODE all the CC4 maps in WaR to "yer standard", (god save us) Smile

Horrors horrors Jim, you need to recode many more maps now, to get em to yer "standard" to avoid the double wall...
Here is Dasbourd from YOUR WaR game mate, with them "double walls" you point out as problems...
I made some arrows to point at the “double walls” Wink sorry I dint mark all of em I got a bit tired of drawing so many arrows pointing to the double walls IN your WAR Dasbourg map…
Start yer 5CC up and starte recode all the 43 maps mate, to get rid of them “trobble some double walls”.. Wink


My english is lausy you know, shall i take yer post as you just turn down my offer to recode 10 maps. Smile

Look all thous nasty double walls in yer dasbourg map mate, brrr "such tradeoffs" Smile :


Last edited by AT_Stalky on Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
AT_Stalky

Rep: 27.4
votes: 10


PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 7:05 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Pzt_Serk wrote:
Hi Stalky,

keep up the good work with maps. Just had a good laugh at the invisible houses lol.

I also just had a shreck team spotted right away in a forest while on ambush mode far from the ennemy...and my general feeling is that cover (concealment) is close to non-existent.so I was wondering if you could also take a look at it.

Infantry is spotted as soon as it moves, even if its a crawl. It makes infantry movement and advance very difficult if not impossible.

Maybe make a comparison with trsm data??

Cheers!


Thanx Serk

But I dont have to look at the TRSM elements datafile, as I have made that file for TRSM 097. Smile

Stalk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
RD_Oddball




PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:35 am Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry Stalky for not being more clear. I was agreeing with you that your suggestion was a legitimate solution. I was just saying that there were no perfect answers or one way to solve the problem as every conceiveable solution has drawbacks. I wasn't trying disprove what you're saying.

Our intent was to follow Schreckens coding style guide which is nearly identical to the solution you're outlining. We felt it was the lesser of all evils. We also agree we didn't always follow that style guide. Which was a mistake we're acknowledging. So we're agreeing with you Also it is very generous of you to recode the maps you have and we appreciate any and all help you're willing to give.

Also my apologies if I came across as glib. Wasn't my intention. I was being sincere in my reply and we're truly grateful to have such passionate, scrutinizing peers who love the same game we love.

I hope this clears up my earlier points. Again my apologies for not being more careful in my last post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
squadleader_id

Rep: 53.2
votes: 7


PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:50 am Post subject: Reply with quote

RD_Oddball wrote:
Sorry Stalky for not being more clear. I was agreeing with you that your suggestion was a legitimate solution. I was just saying that there were no perfect answers or one way to solve the problem as every conceiveable solution has drawbacks. I wasn't trying disprove what you're saying.

Our intent was to follow Schreckens coding style guide which is nearly identical to the solution you're outlining. We felt it was the lesser of all evils. We also agree we didn't always follow that style guide. Which was a mistake we're acknowledging. So we're agreeing with you and will graciously accept your offer to recode the maps or whatever you are interested in contributing.

Also my apologies if I came across as glib. Wasn't my intention. I was being sincere in my reply and we're truly grateful to have such passionate, scrutinizing peers who love the same game we love.

I hope this clears up my earlier points. Again my apologies for not being more careful in my last post.

Nice answer, Jim...
Great to see members of the CCWAR development team starting to really look into this problem (Shrecken too at the Matrix forum)...and not just post bitter comments when people scrutinize their work Smile

Stalky already offered to re-code/fix 10 maps...I think it's only fair that the S3T team also re-check the coding glitches on the rest of the maps...and fix them too.
The actual fix (map txt files) should be very small in size...and offering this as a small patch might be possible using Bernd's CCWARmodinstaller application.

BTW, Stalky...which 10 maps are you working on?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
squadleader_id

Rep: 53.2
votes: 7


PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:18 am Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like the value for "block LOS" (col AB) for Factory Window is also wrong in the CCWAR elements file...thanks for pointing this out in our little chat, Stalky!
It should be "1" like all the other window elements...not "0".
That's why the Stavelot factory ended up the ghostly see-thru building in the game Wink

Here's the now not so ghostly Stavelot factory with fixed elements file:



CCWAR_Stavelot-edit.jpg
 Description:
Stavelot with fixed elements file by AT_Stalky
 Filesize:  286.23 KB
 Viewed:  11166 Time(s)

CCWAR_Stavelot-edit.jpg


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
RD_Oddball




PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:49 am Post subject: Reply with quote

squadleader_id wrote:

Nice answer, Jim...
Great to see members of the CCWAR development team starting to really look into this problem (Shrecken too at the Matrix forum)...and not just post bitter comments when people scrutinize their work Smile


Thank you Squadleader. Was never our intent to come across as bitter. The intent from our perspective has only ever been to illustrate that we've done our homework. Not to defend our mistakes or pretend as if we never made any. We certainly have. And for everyone to acknowledge that we've made good decisions, done a good job despite any clear mistakes. I'm sure there's been communication problems on our part in not doing a better job of tactfully conveying that. We've always been willing to fix any outright mistakes and have done so.

squadleader_id wrote:

Stalky already offered to re-code/fix 10 maps...I think it's only fair that the S3T team also re-check the coding glitches on the rest of the maps...and fix them too.
The actual fix (map txt files) should be very small in size...and offering this as a small patch might be possible using Bernd's CCWARmodinstaller application.


Yes, I couldn't agree more. It was VERY generous of Stalky to have offered to do any at all, let alone 10. And I know Schreck has already gone through a majority of the maps if not all of them to double-check that there weren't any more deviations from his coding guideline.

Thanks for your understanding Squadleader.

For Stalky:

I agree with Squadleader. Would be good if you could post here the names of the 10 maps you've recoded already that way we're not duplicating your efforts. Or even to arrange for those text files to be transferred to Schreck. Much appreciated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
AT_Stalky

Rep: 27.4
votes: 10


PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:33 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

RD_Oddball wrote:
Sorry Stalky for not being more clear. I was agreeing with you that your suggestion was a legitimate solution. I was just saying that there were no perfect answers or one way to solve the problem as every conceiveable solution has drawbacks. I wasn't trying disprove what you're saying.

Our intent was to follow Schreckens coding style guide which is nearly identical to the solution you're outlining. We felt it was the lesser of all evils. We also agree we didn't always follow that style guide. Which was a mistake we're acknowledging. So we're agreeing with you Also it is very generous of you to recode the maps you have and we appreciate any and all help you're willing to give.

Also my apologies if I came across as glib. Wasn't my intention. I was being sincere in my reply and we're truly grateful to have such passionate, scrutinizing peers who love the same game we love.

I hope this clears up my earlier points. Again my apologies for not being more careful in my last post.


np Jim, thanx

I make 10 map recode, i make a list of wich i make. I will try make list tn or tm.

Later men.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
 
RD_Oddball




PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:05 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent! Thank you! Whenever you have time to post the list is good for us. Much appreciated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
 
Post new topicReply to topic printer-friendly view Close Combat Series Forum Index -> Close Combat Wacht am Rhein
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


 
   
 


Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum




Forums ©





In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited and
found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some of the great Close Combat
mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank all the members of our volunteer staff that have
helped over the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!