Jump to content

RepsolCBR

Members
  • Content Count

    1,225
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

RepsolCBR last won the day on May 31

RepsolCBR had the most liked content!

About RepsolCBR

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    Kristinehamn, SWEDEN

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. IIRC this is already in the game... As long as you do not move (or open fire) with your AT-guns or AFVs they are considdered to be in a concealed possition and are harder to spot... This is not graphically represented but rather abstracted... but it is in the game as far as i know 😎
  2. have you considdered buying CM1 ? like Frenchy56 mentioned CMBB do include a full compliment of finnish forces...and there are a decent amount of scenarios covering this part of the war avaliable... sure...its an older game...but still very playable 😎... And as a bonus...you will not only get the finns...but the whole eastern front is covered in that game. Including all the minors. lots and lots of content... you are able to buy that game very cheapaly now...well worth a try if you like the finnish front. I doubt we will ever see finnish troops in CM2 anytime soon...
  3. Google... Kohlenklau finnish and you will find a link to a CM thread covering this project... i would provide the link but i don't know how to copy it while typing on my phone πŸ€”
  4. I belive it was Kohlenklau and a few others that had a finnish front project going...including mods. I don't recall how much stuff they managed to complete before Kohlenklau decided to take a break from CM or where to find it... what they did complete might be avaliable at CMMODS or the scenariodepot... if not...i don't know where to find it...
  5. i'm with IanL on this...best test each battle individually i belive... When testing battle 2 'tweak' it in such a way to represent the most likely casulty-level, ammo situation from battle one...i"m sure you have some sence for what those casualties are likely to be...preferably ΓΆmake something like maybe 3 different versions - via tweaking these levels - to test various likely results from battle one... Next...do the same with battle 3...what is the likely situation after battle 2. make a few versions of that and se how things play out in battle 3. If you are happy with how the 3rd battle tweaks play-out...with regards to difficulty level of the enemy and the likely looks of your remaining forces... now maybe it is time to try the campaign so far...to see if things actually plays out fairly well as espected... it it does... tweak battle 4 to reflect the situation after your test campaign playthrouh... test this 4th tweaked battle...tweak battle 5 and test it.. add the desired battle versions 4 and 5 to the campaign and test it again... it will be a hell of a lot of playtesting...i know...πŸ˜“ finding some playtesters to help out would most certanly be preferable...to not get burnt out by all the playtesting... but if you cant find any doing something like above is what i would do... it is a lot of work though... campaigns are a beast to design...especially when it comes to testing...
  6. yepp...you can. Atleast when designing scenarios. Is it possible in QBs though..?
  7. thanks for your pointers.... i have been temted to try and do a little something i the Normandy setting for quite some time now...using the latest game engine and having the full compliment of modules and vehiclepack to chose from will allow for many possibilities 😁... i will probably give this DCS map thing a try and see if it is a nice tool to use...
  8. its an intresting idea...more options and flexibility could never hurt...or could it ? one risk with giving TO MUCH freedom to the player/scenario designer might be that the realism level will go down...significantelly ! we might see some very wierd 'fantacy' forces in the scenarios/QBs... as far as i know...REALISM is what the majority if CM players value very highely... in this regard the way that BFC have opted to handle unit selection...by picking a formation and from that deselect what you do not want/need is a very clever move... this usually keeps both the player and AI forces on a decent realism level compared to RL... that is a good thing imo... i would very, very, very much like to see more formations being released though...from various timeframes and areas.... that would be totally cool...i desert map for example could be used for many, many scenarios...not just CMSF 2 if we indeed had the required formations... its a shame that BFC is such a small company...if only they had the resourses to design such formations they would sell like hotcake i'm sure 😁
  9. True...I guess that the boccage-type graphics is not avaliable for this map and that they are using various trees to simulate this instead... Might makes it a bit tricky to know wich fields are surrounded by the boccage and wich are not...Not ideal i guess... I wounder if the locations and shape of the fields are correct though...☺️ If they are... and the size of the cities and villages is time specific with a fairly correct building placement... I may give this a try...to make a map using DCS Normandy as a base...and see how it works... I don't have DCS up and running currently though so this will have to wait a while...
  10. Hello... Finding good time-specific areal photographs as well as ground level pictures from 1944 of your desired location for a scenario can be tricky. This got me thinking... Does anybody know how accurate the Normandy map for DCS-world is ? I'm pretty sure that things like roads, rivers, streams and such things are very accurate...But how about the different fields...are they correctly represented or are they just kind of randomely designed ? Same with villages and cities...Are they a good representation of the RL 1944 timeframe ? If the map indeed is fairly accurate it could be a good source for CM Normandy map making. Using both the editor wiew (zoomed in to the right level to show buildings and hedges, boccage and stuff) and well as the in-game wiew. Using the PRINT SCREEN button will allow for taking pictures of the desired map area... thoughts ?
  11. when you say you got hundreds of individual teams... i guess that you are playing the russians ? If this is so...you should know that HIGH numbers is what makes them russians... i think that it is stated in the manual even... 'playing the russians you will be commanding one level up...if you as the americans, brittish or germans use a platoon to carry out an assignment...as the russians you will be using a company. simularely in situations where others use a company the russians will be using a battalion... this kind of results in a rather high unit count when playing the russians... If you are not discurraged and feel that you can afford them...other titles...especially CMBN and CMFI usually have a somewhat smaller unit count in their scenarios IIRC...
  12. i for one most certanly apprisate the work that guys like sgt squarehead, MOS:96B2P, RokinHarry and a few others are doing... imo their experimentations with the editor is something that benefits us all...new tricks and tips are found during their work with regards to how to get the most out of the editor... Thank you, guys ! Even if thing like taxicabs, police stations, anti-drug warfare may not be everbodies cup of tea... idea that spring from these projects may very well become useful in 'ordinary' scenarios also...😁
  13. I fully understand that every idea, every suggestion, can not be brought into the game. Some prioritations/selections has to be made. Ideas that will benefit more people...ideas that are asked by more people ought to take priority. That is perfectly fine. But even smaller, more unique ideas...LIKE THIS ONE should not be forgotten or ignored imo. The developmenttime required to add something like this to the game does not sound like a massive task.... The updates should obviously include the more important (time consuming) improvements but perhaps some of these smaller things could also be squeezed in there from time to time... as a little bonus ☺️... This idea might not be the most important one out there but i don't think anyone would mind to get the option to do what the Sgt suggests...It would not be a negative...and if the time to implement it is rather low...why not...
  14. Maybe the headcount for individual units could default as FORMATION... Meaning it will be a randomish number close to the one selected for its organic HQ (formation)... And if the individual units has a specific headcount selected... That would be the number choosen...all the time. No randomness !
×
×
  • Create New...