Jump to content

Wiggum

Members
  • Content Count

    704
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Wiggum

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Converted

  • Location
    Deutschland

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I always thought: 5.56 (Main Battle Rifle) - Supress and injure (and as personal defense weapon) 7.62 (MG and DMR) - Kill or injure >7.62 (HMG or AMR) - Kill or injure Rifle grenade - Kill or injure Mortar - Kill or injure In other words, while the Rifleman supress the enemy with their 5.56 bullets the other stuff gets setup/adjusted/into position to finish him. For the ordinary infantry soldier the M4 has many advantages over a AK47. Its more handy, less heavy (Rifle and Ammunition). With all the other nasty killing toys a modern western army has i think a short and lightweight 5.56 Main Battle Rifle is the right choice. @ MikeyD Yeah, i would like to see how firefight in todays germany would play out, the building here are like bunkers with thick reinforced concrete walls...
  2. Exactly, a better optimized and well adapted engine could do both...look better and run better. But anyway its not about graphics, its about gameplay and features.
  3. Thats what it means. Its the same old CMx2 engine with some new features. The foundation of Black Sea game is a over 7 year old engine that has its expiry date long exceeded. But (and for a commercial company thats fine) it looks like Battlefront thinks they can make much more money creating module after module and charge money for feature updates to existing games (some call them patches). In the end, the customer decides if and when they will develop a real CMx3 engine. It will be the day that they notice that the CMx2 modules and games no longer sell that well... I skipped every game since the Normandy game and will not buy Black Sea either. Paying 60$ for a 7 year old game with some new content is clearly not for everyone.
  4. I hope they develop CMx3 and stop milking the CMx2 engine over and over again.
  5. Most likely not...it would be very embarrassing for both to use a game like CM for that.
  6. I think that CM terrain not only looks "flat"...it feels flat. I know there is some microterrain abstraction but its way to low if you ask me. While in real life grenade launchers, mortars and anti-materiel rifles are used to kill enemys behind cover, in CM there is nearly no such "cover" and thats why even 5.56mm ammunition from 300m away is able to inflict huge casualties on defenders in a forest.
  7. Hi ! I remember from playing the Normandy game that vehicle crew would, after bailing out and recovering, join the assault...sometimes shooting with their pistols at Tiger tanks ! Is this behavior still in BS ? Will we see die hard attacking Crews shooting their 9mm rounds at a Abrams ?
  8. Im more concerned about the lethality of Infantry Combat. In the CMx2 games the ability to take cover was always modeled way to low and the "breaking point" was way to high so mostly even green conscripts fight to death. When they rout, they mostly do it in a stupid way getting themselves killed anyway. Also Infantry got spotted way to quick. The excuse from Battlefront was always that CM simulates "all in" battles were no side will considering routing or surrendering.
  9. I think its not in the game, like so many other engine features that would be needed to really simulate modern combat (2017). For me BS is a Vehicle Pack (reskin) to SF. ...waiting for CMx3...
  10. Just watched this: They get ambushed by a single Tiger from 700m away and back up but suddenly the Tiger drives towards them in some kind of suicide attack and seconds later is only 10m away from a bunch of Shermans ?! Thats just way to dumb, i think i will skip this movie. And i dont have anything against US war/action-movies but this is just a insult on the common sense of the audience.
  11. Thats because not everyone believes what someone wants them to believe... I dont want to imagine what had happened in Syria if Russia would not have backed Assad !
  12. I think the strength of Islamic extremist militias like the Taliban or ISIS is the steady inflow of fresh fighters. They are very resistant against casualties inflicted on them, remember, the US military in Iraq (from 2003 to 2006) killed ~40.000, wounded ~200.000 and captured ~20.000 insurgents ! But they are still able to attract new fighters... ISIS is also taking heavy casualties, especially when they try to fight like a conventional army (like in Kobane) and especially now with US warplanes in the sky. Its not like they have a unlimited number of tanks, technicals or artillery. Every day they loose more and more equipment because of the airstrikes. If you ask me, Kobane will be the last time they mass their combat power for a full scale assault. They may have enough human material but such heavy casualties dont fit with their propaganda. US airpower will force them to fight a traditional guerilla warfare with a focus on defending their territory, terror (suicide) attacks and smaller assaults (hit and run). About the Iraqi army performance: http://warontherocks.com/2014/07/inside-the-collapse-of-the-iraqi-armys-2nd-division/
  13. This game is not mod friendly, all you can do is to change some textures.
  14. Yeah... The moral rules / suppression effect seems wrong since Shock Force, the CMx1 games have done a much better job in this field, but at least we now have better graphics.
×
×
  • Create New...