new parameters for the modders

[Manu]

So with the release of Pitf and its new features, modders have to consider some new parameters (please correct me if I'm wrong) :
- scale is now 8 pixels/meters (drawings match finally the distances calculated in the game)
- the terrain graphics, as trees, have now an alpha layer. Don't know for the other graphics (planes,gadgets, vehicles, etc)
- vehicle turrets have their own shadows
- graphics must be saved in targa 32 bits (no more 16 bits)
- trees graphics are no more restricted to the 10 *10 pixels square.
- new tools are needed (gadgetmunger and 5CC) to work with the new graphics. I'm sure they will be released soon.

some questions :
what is the maximum size of the maps?
Number of maximum maps allowed in the game?
Maximum size of the stratmap?
Possibility to use again some features of LSA? fixed units - fixed BG (bo) - permanent roof graphics (as the bridge girders)

Thanks to Matrix and the devs as Steve to allow me to keep my hobby alive!!!

[xe5]

Changing the last byte in the battle file from 00 to 01 switches on the 'Use Static Troops' option which displays the static BG icons on the strat map, but the new Platoon requisition system doesnt work with StaticBGs.txt in its LSA format (team class#/tile# x 15 or 21). Possible that StaticBGs.txt requires a new format to define 1st, 2nd and Support Platoon units.

[SteveMcClaire]

ORIGINAL: Manu
some questions :
what is the maximum size of the maps?
Number of maximum maps allowed in the game?
Maximum size of the stratmap?
Possibility to use again some features of LSA? fixed units - fixed BG (bo) - permanent roof graphics (as the bridge girders)

Maximum map size is 40 x 40 mega tiles, or 120 x 120 tiles, or 7680 pixels x 7680 pixels.

Maximum number of maps the game can handle is 64.

The Strategic map image can be (within reason) pretty much as big as you want. It's a single image in CCIMages.pix.

While the old features from previous versions are not specifically supported, most of them will work. Static troops will not work.

[kojusoki1]

Steve,
How can I increase the amount of teams used during game? And what is teh maximum number of avaliable "slots"?
In CC we had 3 platoons, 5 teams each. What is teh situation here? Maps are huge so one might want to increase the quantity.

Michal

[RD Oddball]

One thing that's noteworthy that the 32bit graphics now allow for the alpha masks to be included with the graphic themselves. Additionally the hard edge in the alpha mask is no longer required. You may now use semi-transparent alpha channels for all graphics. The utilization of the specific green colors to identify shadows, etc. is gone. Takes a little bit of getting used to but opens up a lot of possibilities, increased subtlety, and refined look with that change alone.

[SteveMcClaire]

ORIGINAL: kojusoki1
Steve,
How can I increase the amount of teams used during game? And what is teh maximum number of avaliable "slots"?
In CC we had 3 platoons, 5 teams each. What is teh situation here? Maps are huge so one might want to increase the quantity.

Michal

The number of teams available to each battle group depends on the number of company-sized units in its force pool. So you'd need to modify FPools.txt and add more units if you wanted to make BGs have more team slots.

The maximum number is 21 teams, though how many you can select will vary by platoon type as well (a tank platoon with 5 tanks can't fully fill a 7 slot platoon, for example).

[xe5]

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire
The maximum number is 21 teams, though how many you can select will vary by platoon type as well (a tank platoon with 5 tanks can't fully fill a 7 slot platoon, for example).

C:\Matrix Games\Close Combat Panthers in the Fog\DATA\BASE\UnitStructure.txt can be modified to create (ahistorical) 7 tank platoons or entirely new subordinate unit organizations such as Rifle platoons available as support units so you can field an entire infantry company w/o support.

[Southernland]

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire


what is the maximum size of the maps?
Maximum map size is 40 x 40 mega tiles, or 120 x 120 tiles, or 7680 pixels x 7680 pixels.

So what you're saying is... Kursk size? [:D]

[Southernland]

PzIV vz T34/76 @ 7680x100 pixels

[Southernland]

ORIGINAL: Southern_land

PzIV vz T34/76 @ 7680x100 pixels

[DAK_Legion]

Wow!

Kursk for panther in the fog would be great shane:)

)thanks for the screen

[xe5]

ORIGINAL: Southern_land
PzIV vz T34/76 @ 7680x100 pixels

A Steppe Too Far?

[zcharles]

You mean a PanzerDivision vs a tank corp with 21 vs 21 tanks... WITH NEW FOG SYSTEM? That would really allow the famous tank clash.

[Southernland]

ORIGINAL: xe5

ORIGINAL: Southern_land
PzIV vz T34/76 @ 7680x100 pixels

A Steppe Too Far?

\
Hahaha


I love coming back to this thread and just scrolling...

[kweniston]

I cannot believe static troops were killed off after LSA. I was sort of hoping that the CC brand was moving on a road of continuous improvement and expansion; one of the new useful features of LSA for modders were the static troops. GJS for LSA greatly benefits from this feature, and it's gone already with PitF? Unbelievable. The only reason this game exists today is because of the modders keeping it alive all these years, and this is how they're treated. I assume the blowable bridges are gone too then? What else is gone?

Well, so much for the dream of an "ultimate" 2d CC, each version will keep its flaws and shortcomings. Figures.

[Tejszd]

Well put kweniston! Always found it weird with Atomic and now Matrix/Slitherine how features are dropped/unsupported in newer versions. I do not expect every game to use every feature but if its not used it doesn't have to be dropped/left not working....

[SteveMcClaire]

While the game is highly open to modding, and we make a significant effort to support and encourage modders, none of the CC games have ever been intended to be a 'game creation toolkit' for modders to make their own game.  It is just not practical to continue to support ever old feature from ever version of the game that has ever been released.

[kweniston]

Sorry Steve, with all due respect, but then you forget that we are here today talking to each other about CC, ONLY BECAUSE of the modders that have created their own games out of the stock CC.

I think I express a popular opinion when I say that many hoped PitF would be that last ultimate 2d version, which it probably can be with some effort, which would mean that modders would be encouraged to port their (2d) mods to this final and best (2d) Close Combat game. So please, do work on bringing static troops back into the game, that one is a critical addition to the modders toolkit, creating huge new strategical possibilities. Already one of the best mods (GJS) is depending on it. Others can probably add some other great LSA/TLD or WAR features here they want to see implemented, and that most likely CAN be implemented with some effort. They already have been in the game in the past, so why remove them if you are able to keep them for us? This is the last of the 2d, why not go out with a bang?

If not, I sincerely hope the community will receive the source code of Close Combat after PitF and CC has lived out its commercial 2d lifespan, as a final, and -well deserved- token gift to the community, who have asked this for so many years now... a community which, arguably, is the REAL OWNER of this game brand. I expect a solumn ceremony to be organized when this happens.

[xe5]

Although I'll certainly miss the modding opportunities static BGs offered, the German counter-attack at Mortain involved large, organized, mobile formations, not the brittle, rear area, point defense aggregates represented by the b.o. BGs in LSA. Hard to fault the devs for not supporting a feature that isnt pertinent to this game. The 'ultimate' CC isnt possible - you'd never get consensus on what it should be, much less feasibly build it.

[kweniston]

I get that static troops don't get used in the operations in PitF, but why drop something that is already a working feature in the CC game, you yourself say you'll miss the modding opportunities... Why not create a continously improving platform for CC? Now, it's like taking one step forward, two steps back. You get this buggy new feature, you lose this working feature... In the end, I find it disrespect to you and the other modders, and the players who so depend on you.

Also, this is completely in line with removing the direct IP multiplayer connection in PitF and forcing play via the lobby. Direct connections have been working over a decade, and now it's being removed because of "maintenance" costs? Don't give me that BS. Because of this, PitF now officially has an end-of-life countdown timer running already. Tick, tock... Only Slitherine knows when the plug will be pulled.


Edit/Update: if you're not re-implementing direct IP multiplayer connections, don't bother with doing any improvements. Somewhere in the future, PitF will not be playable anyway, after the funding for the lobby has dried up. Best to keep your profits as high possible, so you can happily return the source code to the dog loyal community, after PitF is done. The community who will then do what is needed, and what should have been done long ago. Looking forward to that day.