Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About RedBarron

  • Rank
    Junior Member


  • Location
    Lynnwood, WA
  1. They were on different days. The computer parts came from New Egg earlier in the week. Then a day or so later a little AR magazine vest came via Amazon. Then after that my pants came via Amazon too. So three packages on three different days. The kicker was that other packages from Amazon arrived the on the same day as my pants, apparently unmolested! It was all baby shower things for my wife's baby shower last Sunday. My pants were probably delivered on an earlier truck than her Amazon order. So yeah, I went home from work yesterday as soon as I saw my video card was out on a truck for delivery. Package secured!
  2. It seems to me like the surefire way to get past that APS is to get a couple of ATGM's fired off at the same target at one time. Maybe set up "talking" ATGM's ala MG's. Of course, easier said than done, getting two ATGM teams to fire on the same target at roughly the same time.
  3. I haven't recorded anything yet, but I think this is the best way to accomplish it (in WeGo. Real time seems self explanatory). 1. Make a save in each review phase. Save it in a way that makes sense chronologically. 2. FRAPS each review phase how ever you like, as many times and from as many angles as you like. 3. Video editing magic happens here. 4. ??? 5. Profit!
  4. Nice video A co! Biggest thing I've seen a bird drop was a HMMV (pre up-armored version). There was that one time a Blackhawk's tire dropped right between the legs of Lcpl Pierson while he lay on his back on top of the load being slung.... but that's a different kind on dropping. Back to on topic, it is a clear call that we are talking about something that would fall outside of the scope of a CM mission. With most missions focusing on the most intense parts of a battle battle happening in a less than 2 hour period, actions like this are very administrative in nature that would generally fall outside of the time frame captured.
  5. This is probably the largest obstacle to wargaming. After that, it is more that crunchy wargaming like CM is just a very specialized and acquired taste. There is something more universal about pirates, elves, Jedi Knights, and other fantastical things over real world historical based games that try to accurately model the period or feel, or something fictional, but trying to hold on as much as possible to real world fidelity of simulation. I have multiple friends who are very into gaming on both sides of the coin (electronic and board). They have multiple regularly scheduled board gaming nights. It is very rare for crunchy war games to come out in those groups. Generally I have to find specific people who also tend to gravitate to wargaming and tactics to find someone to play a board game like Combat Commander, Sekigahara, or even something like Axis and Allies. Crunchier games are much more involved, take a higher level of concentration, and that generally leads to a reduced level of social interaction. Combat Mission is about as crunchy as it gets on the tactical combat level.
  6. I just got mine in the mail last week (hooray black friday deals). I am excited to slot that puppy in (but not so much to do the work to transfer everything over to that drive from my old, 1/2 the space HDD). I am waiting on a new video card as I type (boo someone stealing a box of pants off my porch from black friday deals). (hooray they didn't get my SSD or headphones)
  7. I was an 0481 in the Corps for the first decade of this century, and there was rumor one time while my company was in Iraq that we might be involved in recovering a downed Blackhawk somewhere out in the desert. The plan would have been to fly in via some CH-53e, have them drop us off, and then we would go to work rigging it up so that one of them could do an external lift (hooking up external lifts was the "coolest" part of an 0481's job).Of course we would have needed security to do that, so it wouldn't have just been a couple of helps and a squad of 0481's doing the work. One of our SNCO's was trying hard to get the mission approved. Instead I think they did it via trucks and Heavy Equipment in a convoy. Battle damaged stuff does need to get extracted, and that bird did get recovered. The way the mission was planned included security elements (probably grunts from our base security in Al Assad). The plan there was never to extract something under direct fire, but to be able to provide security to deter that from being a possibility to the enemy. A scenario would probably be modeled best around similar circumstances (random enemy reinforcements, with very few on map at the start?).
  8. Best they hit them with everything, and see what sticks!
  9. I would think that the closest thing BF would consider is modeling wreckers that could drag around disabled vehicles. I imagine it would use similar coding to how AT guns are hitched, un hitched, and towed behind trucks (something I haven't experienced yet in game, only having the base version of CMBN). That way you could at least recover vehicles. It would be interesting, especially if you could move them off the friendly edge (which I think has to be enabled via the scenario design, as opposed to something like TacAI, which happens regardless of scenario). Even then, I think Apocal's point stands in the scenario above. Recovering vehicles probably happens outside of combat generally. In order to make it happen you'd have to do a few things. You would have to research and model wreckers and their crew. You'd also have to come up with some system for how long the process would take, and figure out interruptions (because surely the crew could com under fire and be pressed to retreat in the context of a CM scenario). Finally you would have to code it all (and like I said, you could probably pull from the other towing code, but it might also include an overhaul of all towable vehicle properties by adding a "towable" category). Oh, and of course there is testing and the like. All of that would be a lot of work for what is probably very little gain, especially compared to other things that are high up on their list. However, it could make for some interesting scenarios. Provide security for a crew extracting a downed vehicle, which (of course) ends up getting contacts (because that would be a boring mission otherwise). There probably is a more abstract way of accomplishing a similar scenario with current versions of the CM franchise. Now if only they had unlimited time and money…...
  10. Thread winner! Seriously, that is awesome. Back end chopped off, two different sized sets of tires. That's some new world dark ages enginuity right there.
  11. You know what, on second thought scratch that request. I'll happily throw down $25 to buy that bundle again, and gift the second licence to my brother. Or better yet, have him buy the license (hence setting up his own darn account), so he can buy more titles later. Boom. Download problem solved (as well as a Christmas gift problem!).
  12. First off, Battlefront, if this violates any forum rules or licencing stuff, please accept my apologies and we can remove/edit/or-what-ever-it-is-you-do-to this post. I couldn't find anything on the forum rules prohibiting this ask, and it seems cool via the licencing stuff, but you guys know your product better than I. Disclaimer aside, here is the meat an potatoes of my post: Is it possible that anyone could help me out in some way with obtaining an electronic copy of this bundle? This was my first purchase from BF back in May of 2009. A couple of computer overhauls, a half a decade later, my interest renewed in this franchise (why have I left it fallow for so long!), and with the whole CMBS coming out has given me a hankering to push some LAV's and AAV's around again. And wouldn't you know, I never did save a backup copy. Of course, I learned my lesson when I bought CMBN two years ago. I have multiple thumb drives with those downloads on it!
  13. When teams are given a "fast" order, they focus on getting to their way point, and try to get there at all costs (unless they get pinned). That comes at the sacrifice of situational awareness. Conversely, the "hunt" order is just about the complete opposite. They focus on maximizing their situational awareness on the way to their way point at the sacrifice of speed. And as a counterpoint to the "fast" order's "getting there at all costs", a "hunt" order cause a unit to halt once it spots a threat (be it actually seeing something, or seeing bullets whiz overhead, or into a buddy in the team). Once it has halted, it will try to preserve their life, which usually includes firing on the threat, if they can, and taking cover in the square they are in, which could as simple as hitting the deck. Since vehicles don't hit the deck like infantry, you usually just see them stop. Those are two extreme ends of the movement order spectrum. For vehicles, "quick" and "slow" are the middle grounds between the two. My suggestion in your scenario is to replace the "hunt" order with "slow". Your tank will continue on to the their way point with the "slow" order, but will have an increased situational awareness (thus a higher chance to spot the tank sooner). Also, since it is moving slow, it will have a much better chance of putting its rounds on target once it spots a threat. Combine a "slow" order with a covered "target armor arc" order set at the end of the previous "move" order waypoint, and it will ignore any infantry threats. That should ensure a higher chance that turret will be pointing at the armored threat as soon as the threat is spotted, but it might bite you in the ass when that infantry contact your vehicle ignored turned out to have some AT asset that was able to give your tank a little love tap, because no machine guns were discouraging the infantry's "unwanted advances". On a side note, I doubt that a "target armor arc" order placed before a "hunt" order would mean a vehicle would continue on despite infantry contacts. Based on what I remember from the manual that shouldn't work. That's based purely on my understanding of the manual. I haven't tried it out myself.
  14. "Yes I am recording Ian!" Scripted lines of a true professional.....
  15. Ha! I knew I should have dropped that tech savvy bit. My emphasis was more on the second part. I use my PC at home exclusively for games, but a Mac for work. I am much less tech savvy than you, more likely than not. I just email, do some word docs, and dink around on spreadsheets to keep inventory accounted for / sourced. So far I have been rocking 3.0 CMBN (no expansions), and I purchased CMSF, but may have lost my key/download. I'll be remedying that for myself next month, as I stock up on all the expansions. And I'll buy whichever module has Finns (RT I assume) I'll snatch that up at the drop of a hat! How is it that I've let this game sit on my digital shelf for so long!?
  • Create New...