Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Lamb Chop, Captain Kangaroo, Romper Room, New Zoo Review...we are going down the rabbit hole. AHHHHHHHHH!!!

 

Mord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Mord said:

I've always found that perverse, people making accounts to agree with themselves. It's just so weird.

Mord.

Indeed, One can do that very well with just a single account. A guy named Other Mord has shown us how.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Kevin2k said:

A guy named Other Mord has shown us how.

I must admit, Other Mord is pretty badass! Not quite as BA as (regular) Mord but close!

 

Mord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has the M320 grenade launcher been removed from the TO&E? The M320 went into production in November 2008, and was issued to  the U.S. Army in July 2009. However, they weren't issued to the U.S.M.C. until June 2013, yet there are Marine scenarios, based in 2008 that have the M320 instead of the M203. The max effective range for the M320 is 150 (point) to 350 (area). The effective ranges for the M203 is the same. So there is no effect from deleting the M320 except visually and realistically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did correct for some original CMSF1 TO&E issues which seemed likely to happen for 2008 that we now know didn't come to pass.  The Marines, in particular, had some issues because at the time they had announced a bunch of changes which seemed to be pretty sure bets.  The switch to M320 was one of them.  With CMSF2 all Marines armed with the M320 in CMSF1 should be armed with the M203 now.  That includes stock scenarios.  The artwork should also be consistent with that, though honestly I don't remember if we short cutted and left in the M320 artwork.  As you say, the simulated effect is identical no matter what as the M203 and M320 are in that sense identical.

A couple other Marine changes was reducing the amount of M4s that were in use for CMSF1 in place of M16s.  There had been a stated intention to give certain positions the shorter, lighter M4 for operational reasons.  As far as I know much of that was scrapped.  In particular the M32 operator, which itself was scaled way back from what was on paper back in 2007.  Which means CMSF1 M32 operators were more plentiful and armed with a M4 as a rifle, now in CMSF2 they are less plentiful and have a M16A4 as their rifle.

The most interesting Marine exception you can see in CMSF2 is the Scout Platoon in the MEU.  They use the M4A1 carbine exclusively in place of the M16A4.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

We did correct for some original CMSF1 TO&E issues which seemed likely to happen for 2008 that we now know didn't come to pass.  The Marines, in particular, had some issues because at the time they had announced a bunch of changes which seemed to be pretty sure bets.  The switch to M320 was one of them.  With CMSF2 all Marines armed with the M320 in CMSF1 should be armed with the M203 now.  That includes stock scenarios.  The artwork should also be consistent with that, though honestly I don't remember if we short cutted and left in the M320 artwork.  As you say, the simulated effect is identical no matter what as the M230 and M320 are in that sense identical.

A couple other Marine changes was reducing the amount of M4s that were in use for CMSF1 in place of M16s.  There had been a stated intention to give certain positions the shorter, lighter M4 for operational reasons.  As far as I know much of that was scrapped.  In particular the M32 operator, which itself was scaled way back from what was on paper back in 2007.  The most interesting Marine exception you can see in CMSF2 is the Scout Platoon in the MEU.  They use the M4A1 carbine exclusively in place of the M16A4.

Steve

Thank you Steve for that info! It makes sense for the Force Recon Scouts to carry the M4 since they shouldn't be engaging anyway unless absolutely necessary! I'm not surprised that the Corps was considering M4s. Military always train to fight the LAST war, and that was MOUT in Iraq where the shorter barrel of the M4 was more effective in building entry. It would be cool if the actual U.S. Forces used a "kit" system like Great Britain so we could equip our infantry with what they need based on the anticipated mission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The patch didn't address the portrait issues that I brought up. The Spies are still using Combatant and Fighter portraits. The US still isn't using an armor portrait. And there was a Syrian armor portrait in the patch (as well as the original brzs) that isn't being used.

And the ATGM squads (D Company, 1st Platoon) in the Reserves is still wearing full camo instead of OD like the rest of the Reserves.

 

Mord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE, remove from the "available troops" roster the units that require a module not installed. I made a scen with a Syrian SF company, and when I tried to load it, the game said go **** myself or get the Marine module.It seems the squads armed with RPG7D3 are to be blamed since the scenario will load only if the soldiers have RPG-29. Also, the airborne troops belonging to the Marines are present into the Base Game roster. So please, remove anything that doesn't belong to the installed modules. I spent countless hours making oobs and scenarios that doesn't work, or looking for specialist teams that are nowhere to be found(although I asume they should be). Please, do something !!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am certain that we all feel your pain.  However, maybe get a part-time gig delivering papers or summink, so you could buy the other modules?  All the CM2 games are so much better with all modules installed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

😂 😅 Yeah...problem is we use CM to do the battles of our weekly campaign and we don't need the Marines module for it. Besides, I doubt I'd ever get enough money for it by delivering newspapers, since everybody around here reads the news online. Anyway, thank you for your gracious hint...  😓

Edited by Cambronne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

We did correct for some original CMSF1 TO&E issues which seemed likely to happen for 2008 that we now know didn't come to pass.  The Marines, in particular, had some issues because at the time they had announced a bunch of changes which seemed to be pretty sure bets.  The switch to M320 was one of them.  With CMSF2 all Marines armed with the M320 in CMSF1 should be armed with the M203 now.  That includes stock scenarios.  The artwork should also be consistent with that, though honestly I don't remember if we short cutted and left in the M320 artwork.  As you say, the simulated effect is identical no matter what as the M203 and M320 are in that sense identical.

A couple other Marine changes was reducing the amount of M4s that were in use for CMSF1 in place of M16s.  There had been a stated intention to give certain positions the shorter, lighter M4 for operational reasons.  As far as I know much of that was scrapped.  In particular the M32 operator, which itself was scaled way back from what was on paper back in 2007.  Which means CMSF1 M32 operators were more plentiful and armed with a M4 as a rifle, now in CMSF2 they are less plentiful and have a M16A4 as their rifle.

The most interesting Marine exception you can see in CMSF2 is the Scout Platoon in the MEU.  They use the M4A1 carbine exclusively in place of the M16A4.

Steve

I just checked the Semper Fi; Syria campaign, dated 12/23/18, and it still shows the M320 graphic, and when you mouse over the Scout weapons in the UI, it says M4/M320. I downloaded that campaign from the "Patches" tab on the BFC Web Site. it is dated as I said above, 12/23/18. Is that the one that's supposed to have been updated? Referencing the above request from @Cambronne, is it possible the Semper Fi; Syria campaign is the wrong one?

Edited by Vet 0369

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick responses...

I only saw the portrait report late in the patch cycle and punted a fix into the mix that should have fixed it.  I guess not :(  Must be something in the code that needs to be tweaked, not the TO&E side of things.  I submitted a fresh report on those.

I did fix an issue with Syrian AT uniforms, but apparently I missed that location.  CM was never designed to handle the subtlety of uniform mixes we've since introduced, so it's sometimes a royal PTIA to straighten out.  I'll get it fixed.

I'll check into the possibility that an PRG choice might be requiring a Module.  What surprises me is that you are getting the option in the Editor even though you don't own the Module.  Plus, the PRG-7 should be available to Syrian Special Forces Company from the Base Game.

The M320 might be baked into some scenarios. We muscled through some pretty confusing coding stuff to get it straightened out, so it might not work for things already made.  Reworking scenarios, not to mention campaigns, is not a trivial thing to do so we stay away from doing that if at all possible.

Steve

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I only saw the portrait report late in the patch cycle and punted a fix into the mix that should have fixed it.

Hold the phone on the Syrian Armor portrait! It does work. There are so many tank options under other formations I missed it. It comes up when you choose tanks under Armor. Sorry, I must've only looked under Republican Guards and Mech Infantry the other day. When you choose tank platoons under them you get the Mech and Rep Guard portraits.

Everything else is is correct though. No US armor and Spy portraits and the Reserve camo is still there.

Again, sorry for the false alarm on the Syrian portrait. You guys got enough to do without needing to chase your tails.

 

There's a similar problem in Black Sea where no US formation will use a US tank portrait when tanks are involved. and the Russians and Ukrainians don't use their Infantry portraits.

 

Mord.

Edited by Mord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On January 7, 2019 at 4:44 PM, Cambronne said:

PLEASE, remove from the "available troops" roster the units that require a module not installed. I made a scen with a Syrian SF company, and when I tried to load it, the game said go **** myself or get the Marine module.It seems the squads armed with RPG7D3 are to be blamed since the scenario will load only if the soldiers have RPG-29. Also, the airborne troops belonging to the Marines are present into the Base Game roster. So please, remove anything that doesn't belong to the installed modules. I spent countless hours making oobs and scenarios that doesn't work, or looking for specialist teams that are nowhere to be found(although I asume they should be). Please, do something !!!

 

The RPG-7D3 was added in the Marines along with the Syrian Airborne. It shouldn't be part of the "Available Forces" selections if you don't have that module. If it's TO&E for Syrian SF in the base game, then that's a different issue. Either way, it shouldn't be there without the Marines module.

Edited by Vet 0369

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I find very annoying is that when a vehicle gets bogged and then immobilized it becomes unavailable in all next missions of the campaign although it does not count as a destroyed vehicle.

Had a stryker bogged and immobilized on the very first mission of TF thunder in the very first turn. So that vehicle was lost for the remainder of the campaign. I'm sure someone would bring a shovel when going to war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, RexSaur said:

One thing I find very annoying is that when a vehicle gets bogged and then immobilized it becomes unavailable in all next missions of the campaign although it does not count as a destroyed vehicle.

Had a stryker bogged and immobilized on the very first mission of TF thunder in the very first turn. So that vehicle was lost for the remainder of the campaign. I'm sure someone would bring a shovel when going to war.

That's a campaign file issue. The designer could amend that so vehicles can return to the fight later. Although immobilised could mean more than just a stuck wheel. Could be engine damage caused the vehicle to become immobilised, or vehicle damaged whilst trying to recover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Mord said:

Hold the phone on the Syrian Armor portrait! It does work. There are so many tank options under other formations I missed it. It comes up when you choose tanks under Armor. Sorry, I must've only looked under Republican Guards and Mech Infantry the other day. When you choose tank platoons under them you get the Mech and Rep Guard portraits.

Everything else is is correct though. No US armor and Spy portraits and the Reserve camo is still there.

 You can add Army Mech Infantry portraits to the list. There's no formation that utilizes them. The only Army portraits that show up now are Infantry, Stryker, and Heavy Infantry.

 

Mord.

Edited by Mord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RexSaur said:

Had a stryker bogged and immobilized on the very first mission of TF thunder in the very first turn. So that vehicle was lost for the remainder of the campaign. I'm sure someone would bring a shovel when going to war.

There is a feature for the campaign where the author can set the likely hood of vehicles being repaired between battles. A low likely hood simulates a tight timeline where the next battle quickly follows the first. A high likely hood simulates a longer time-fame where damaged vehicles can be recovered, repaired and returned to the fight.

As @George MC says sometimes the damage is extensive so the repair is a percentage chance not a certainty.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

why was the pickup removed from the single vehicle list of unconventional forces? Will you put it back with another patch? The only vehicle left in the list is the taxi transport.

Also, the passengers could fire from the vehicle in the other titles (including SF1). They cannot do it now! Will you fix this with a patch as well?

Edited by Cambronne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mord said:

You can add Army Mech Infantry portraits to the list. There's no formation that utilizes them. The only Army portraits that show up now are Infantry, Stryker, and Heavy Infantry.

I've noticed some redundancy in the game files, duplicates and the like. Not sure if/how they are utilized but for what its worth, US Heavy infantry is mech infantry. You if you make a mech infantry themed icon then that'll be the heavy infantry icon in current nomenclature. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:

if you make a mech infantry themed icon then that'll be the heavy infantry icon in current nomenclature.

Ahh! GOOD to know! Thanks! Yeah, the brzs for SF2 are dirty as all get out. There's a ton of left over trash in them, it never occurred to me that that bled into the portraits. The uniforms are a horror show.

Mord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Cambronne said:

Also, the passengers could fire from the vehicle in the other titles (including SF1). They cannot do it now! 

Sorry for that, yesterday I found out that the passengers CAN fire from open-top vehicles such as the pickup. Unlike in SF1, in SF2 the UAZ has now the top covered, meaning the soldiers cannot fire from inside.

But the gaps in the specialist teams and single vehicle list remain (Syrian MMG team, uncon pickup and others). In my opinion many of the weapons and vehicles present in the formation roster are missing from the specialist teams or single vehicle list. Maybe next patch should address this.

Edited by Cambronne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...