Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/17/2015 in all areas

  1. The 101st Airborne had trouble doing this even against light opposition in Iraq. They were supposed to be securing the highway and towns that made up the 3ID's supply lines but needed (and received) tanks for the actual fighting. Even then, they didn't have enough firepower on hand (three or four companies of Abrams) and found themselves snarled up in some nasty fights in built-up areas that the 3rd Infantry Division had smashed their way through without even slowing down. The other major light infantry centric operation was a sideshow; the 173rd Airborne Brigade dropped onto an airfield already held (and marked by) friendly-forces then stayed mostly static while calling down gobs of airpower to beat up Iraqis that were going out of their way to not inconvenience them. The major Iraqi formations in the north had already largely disintegrated and the brigade's presence didn't draw any defenders away from Baghdad. It was a sop to the original war plan that envisioned the 4ID coming from Turkey. Overall it wasn't exactly a grand showing and one big reason the original plan of having light infantry take Baghdad was scrapped in favor of just sending heavy forces in. edit: I guess taking Umm Qasr kinda counts, but there were tanks involved there as well, so I'm not sure how much credit is due. Even facing only lightly armed militias in Fallujah, tanks (and other forms of protected firepower) were the big winners: "By far the best two supporting arms used were tanks and CAAT. Tanks and CAAT were the infantryman’s best friend. The battle would have been incredibly bloodier if it hadn’t been for tanks and CAAT. The tanks were able to provide a 120 mm direct fire weapon on the spot of any contact within a matter of minutes. The thermal sites were able to pinpoint exact position of snipers and then effectively neutralize them within seconds. CAAT was able to use its M2 .50 caliber machine guns and Mk19 grenade launchers to breach as well as destroy buildings were fire was received from. CAAT also helped the squads by clearing the buildings that lined the street in their lane. The infantry should never attack in MOUT without tanks or CAAT." CAAT = Combined Anti-armor Team, basically the infantry battalion's heavy weapons -- TOWs, MK19s, 50cals -- mounted on Humvees and operated as mixed sections. In the remainder of the AAR, they are very clear about the necessity to employ combined arms in built-up terrain, relying on firepower arms as primary killing tool, rather than sending infantry to clear buildings the hard way. This is consistent with every other AAR to come out of urban fighting in the last four or five decades. Massive amounts of airpower and moving at a snail's pace while praying you don't get caught out anywhere.
    3 points
  2. carl, you know some of these guys are trying to help you. I wouldn't go alienating people who are trying to help you, makes a person look bad, you know.
    2 points
  3. This scenario covers the following action (as recorded by von Plato in his history of 5th Panzer Division) in the closing stages of Operation Bagration. Smorgon is on the main rail line from Minsk to Vilnius – hence it was strategically vital for allowing Germans to bring units into action. They were low on fuel/transport so railways were a vital component for keeping armies supplied and flow of reinforcements/moving units etc. The Soviets had just cut the rail line. 5th Panzer Division under the command of Major -General Karl Decker (His General Staff Officer or Ia was Lieutenant-Colonel Anton Detlev von Plato) or at least what was left of it, was concentrated into one group for a last gasp attack. "Early on 6 July an armored group with I./ Pz. Gren. Rgt.14 and I./ Pz. Gren. Rgt. 13 and Pz.Rgt. 31 is formed under Colonel Lippert. The II./ Pz. Gren. Rgt.14 takes Sakowice and II. / Pz. 13 the section west of it on the road of advance. The armored group moves out at about 11.00 am. After short, heavy fighting the enemy is thrown north of Sakowice. The armored group thrusts above Krasne Osinowka until just before the railway, southwest of Smorgon, nearly 10 km deep. Then our power is exhausted at Osinowka - Bialkoszcyna as the enemy throws new armored units against us." The scenario covers later part of this attack i.e. the armoured kampfgruppe's thrust to Osinowka - Bialkoszcyna. By this stage in the fighting 5th Panzer had been in continuous heavy combat since 27th June, moving to and fro across a huge area. By the evening of the 5th July it had endured several cycles of full on combat. By the 6th July and was starting to show signs of strain and this final throw of the diec was to be it's last major offensive and combat cycle during Operation Bagration. Many of the panzergrenadier companies were down to 35 men. Their armoured strength had gone from 70 Panzer V Panthers and 55 Panzer IVs to a recorded strength on the evening of the 5th July of 25 Panthers and 25 PzIVs. From a CM perspective such heavy casualties mean it's possible to simulate this without having hundreds of units on the map. Correspondingly the map is huge - 3km wide x 4.5km deep. The map is based on a contemporary Russian map of the area. What it highlights is this area was at least fairly suitable for a large scale armoured attack. It's one of the few areas in this part that's not bog and wood infested - being mostly rolling terrain with patches of wood but generally fairly open sight lines. The down side is several rivers/streams run across the terrain which mean the Germans had to attack across these natural barriers. The attack did make headway but the Soviets managed to very quickly push armoured units (from the 3rd Guards Cavalry Corps and 3rd Guards Mech Corps under General Oslikovski) into the area. These are the attacks that halt the tired and run down 5th Panzer. Playing the Scenario This scenario was originally designed to be played first and foremost from the perspective of the German side against the Soviet AI. It is playable head to head (H2H) but has not been playtested for balance in this regard. I suspect it’ll be a tough one for the German player – so if playing H2H let the less experienced player take the Soviets. When playing this do so with the mindset you are playing a min campaign. Due to the size of map and tactical challenges you’ll need to tackle this as a linked series of actions rather than one decisive action. It's now available for download at the following links: Scenario Depot III The Repository The image below is taken looking north. It shows the first water barrier a mainly marshy/boggy stream. Behind is a low ridge and rolling terrain. The village ahead is KARAVAI Another shot - this time looking east across the German line of attack. This is further north. It's the small hamlet of LIAUKI about 700m south of OSINOWKA. Another full scale view of the map. Again looking north. From the Soviet side of the hill. T34s from 3rd Guards Mech Corps counterattack the German armoured spearhead. This view is looking south towards LIAUKI/CHADAKI
    1 point
  4. Timn's Rural Road The map has a rural theme, and is based around couple gravel roads, a farm, and some marshland. -Size: 2256x1392 - A mostly flat map with lots of subtle variations in elevation and a couple of low hills -very few buildings, most of which are centered around a farmyard -Lots of open fields -several thick patches of trees which are not vehicle passable -Quite a few less thick patches of trees which vehicles can pass through -A large marsh/lake area in the Northeast of the map -Several smaller strips of marsh -No landmark names Please feel free to use this map as you wish. You can change anything you want for your scenarios. Map Only Download: https://www.dropbox.com/s/mo3b21gjb03n8te/Timn%27s%20Rural%20Road%20-%20Map%20Only.btt?dl=0 I have also put together several Quick Battle variations using this map. They are strictly PVP, since I have not yet ventured into setting up AI plans. Still, I hope they may provide some interesting battles. Tiny Attack: https://www.dropbox.com/s/y05po24j9qt4304/Timn%27s%20Rural%20Road-PVP-Attack-Tiny.btt?dl=0 Small Attack: https://www.dropbox.com/s/p0zdj03g2skksmv/Timn%27s%20Rural%20Road-PVP-Attack-Small.btt?dl=0 Medium Attack: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vmtcjpn30icebaq/Timn%27s%20Rural%20Road-PVP-Attack-Medium.btt?dl=0 Large Attack: https://www.dropbox.com/s/3hzu4x7ueu04h4l/Timn%27s%20Rural%20Road-PVP-Attack-Large.btt?dl=0 Tiny QB Layout Small QB Setup Medium QB Setup Large QB Setup
    1 point
  5. paper tigers Road to Dinas was incredible and unique - red on red civil war. probably the best balanced campaign CMSF ever had forces wise
    1 point
  6. Has anybody brought up the war of Yom Kippur as an idea? M60s and Centurions holding off hordes of Egyptian and Syrian tanks
    1 point
  7. There are very few scenario designers at all, let alone scenario designers who also create mods. Individuals who want their game to look a certain way through the use of mod tags can have all the scenarios that they play look the way they want to by having the scenario itself, through the use of a text file, look for and use the mod. Therefore the mod itself doesn't need to be specifically associated with the scenario in order for the mod to be used so the player can have all the King Tigers in every scenario look a certain way if they want to. Granted, that forces a mod user to either create a text file or use a text file that would presumably be supplied by the one who created the mod and add that text file to the scenario in the editor, but I don't see what the advantage would be to forcing the player to have duplicate art files for every scenario the player wants to use the mod with. In the case of the text file the player has to tell the scenario to look for the mod art file in a certain location, but if you have scenario sub folders holding mod art then all you are doing is forcing the person to put duplicate art folders in every scenario .. folder. Of course, the scenarios themselves don't have an individual 'folder' to begin with. They are all just individual files located in the scenario sub folder so I guess you would have to then manually create a scenario specific sub folder and have the game use that subfolder somehow by placing the scenario file and the mod files all in the scenario specific file that is located in the main scenario sub file? In that case then each scenario would be in it's own scenario specific sub folder within the scenario folder and if you had no mods then the scenario sub folder would just have the scenario file by itself? Why would people not using mods need the scenario files to be in its own separate sub file though - it would only be necessary for the use of mods so it seems like a lot of unnecessary work by BFC since just having the individual scenario file in the scenario sub folder works just fine as is. Or maybe you want to have a separate scenario folder in the Z folder where you put all your mods (So the Z folder would have a different sub folder for each scenario) - but of course your mods are all going in the Z folder now anyway so I'm not sure what advantage there would be to having fifty copies of the same mod file in separate scenario folders when you can just have a single mod file in the Z folder that the scenario uses the text file to access. In short, I suppose your suggestion may have some merit, but I fail to see how it would improve on the current system. You have to tell the scenario to look for the mod somewhere. The only thing you seem to be suggesting is that the player should keep duplicate copies of mod art for each scenario (or scenario specific art for a single scenario) as opposed to having a single art file that is accessible by any scenario.
    1 point
  8. Hi Carl, I am seeing your point but it is coming across as sub-optimized for you personally. Born from your understandable frustrations with finding mods and determining which ones to use. Which is real personal based on taste and maybe a mod management program would help you? I recommend Jonesoft Generic Mod Enabler. Oh, and a repository upgrade might sure help in mod search frustrations. I only use GaJ site. I also think the majority of scenario authors never produce special mods to go with their scenarios. I have often done a special mod to go with a scenario. If my procedure is lacking then that is on me and not the modtag system. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. The game ships with no mods in the z folder but the modtag system is in use beyond the z folder tagging and your subfolder system proposal would not seem to solve things such as snow or mud or location and some specific units or types of units. Scenario writing is hard enough as well as campaign writing and more work to go and scrape up the proper versions for the scenario rather than the modtag automatic system doing it. I am glad we have the modtag system. It does what I want just by the scenario author importing a modtag text file. I can even edit that scenario and add to the modtags text line to call up my own special mods. No special subfolder. And for those folks who enjoy a QB... mod tags allow the proper stuff to be there without a special subfolder. I just remembered someone already tried your system with a huge mod pack download subfolder to allow his scenario/campaign to have its own special music, special tanks, etc. dragonwyn maybe? "In the fields where the poppies lie"... Maybe run a poll and see what number of folks would go with that approach versus what we have now. This should be a separate thread if it is indeed a passionate issue with you. Take care!
    1 point
  9. Honestly I think the modders disagree with you. And as to user friendly, it is absolutely 0% harder than adding any mod. In fact for the user you just do exactly what you already do.That should be enough for you to question the validity of your reasoning. If not, oh well. It really isn't worth arguing over. It is ultimately BF's decision and it is them you'd need to convince. My agreeing or not with you doesn't really affect that much if at all.
    1 point
  10. My two cents no new Patches will come for a while.
    1 point
  11. Hi. I liked this scenario ! Quick comments. the recon phase was nice.. some ppl above commented that they could only see two to three at most BMPs.. HOWEVER, if you stand up your units, and remove them from the HIDE command., you will be able to see at least 2 to 3 more.. further back. The point target with arty went fantastic. The Final Assault by the Syrians was a nice surprise I won the battle as a US Minor Victory. the end report told me i occupied all positions alpha, bravo, charlie, x-ray. However, i can almost swear that i didn't occupy charlie with any of my units. could it be ? Minor bug? Just gently asking.. Other than that- I ENJOYED IT. Thanks agusto.
    1 point
  12. I think you may have missed something here: It is not the scenarios in themselves that are going to use all the HDD space, but the mods. Some mod sets can be huge. For instance my Factory Mod set for Red Thunder (probably the largest there is): It is 603 MB´s. So if you used that for four scenarios, you would have used nearly 2,5 GB of HDD space.
    1 point
  13. I ran a livestream while testing this scenario. You can find it here: http://www.twitch.tv/raptor_pilot I'll warn you, there's about 5 hours of gameplay to wade through. I'll be posting some highlights later. The stream's not super quality, I'm trying to find settings that work. So far I'm enjoying the scenario. One of my tanks got immobilized on the wrong side of the airport, and that pissed me off a bit. I also wasted time hunting down an enemy team outside of Alpha. I have a platoon securing Alpha right now, but the enemy tanks have just showed up. I'm going to have to take care of them before I can commit the rest of my forces. Also, I have never, ever used a CAAT team before. Hopefully they won't just get blown up. I did manage to hit a T-72 with a TOW missile, but the thing just shrugged it off and kept driving. Grrr. One thing I will say, the enemy tanks just seem to be sprinting across the map, with no real concern about locating my forces. My one operational Abrams killed three T-72's and the rest of them just drove right on by. Maybe adding time to the A.I. waypoints might slow them down a little, and let them observe a bit more. Right now they're just driving at full speed while buttoned up directly into a hasty ambush. Once I have highlights I'll post them on YouTube and link them here.
    1 point
  14. U.S. Marine Corps[edit] The U.S. Marine Corps, has retained the regiment as a basic unit smaller than a division but larger than a battalion, and it continues to employ reinforced regiments as R.C.T.s in Iraq and Afghanistan. Under current US Marine Corps doctrine, a Marine Division typically contains three organic Marine infantry regiments. Whenever a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) is formed within its parent Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF), one of the division’s infantry regiments is designated as the base of the Regimental Combat Team (RCT) and serves as the Ground Combat Element (GCE) of the MEB. The regiment, commanded by a colonel, consists of a Headquarters Company and three identical Marine infantry battalions. The regiment is then heavily reinforced by other division assets to form the RCT. These reinforcements typically include: One artillery battalion (drawn from the division’s organic artillery regiment), consisting of a Headquarters and Service Battery and four identical firing batteries, each containing six 155mm towed howitzers; An armored vehicle battalion equivalent, consisting of an Assault Amphibian Company (Reinforced) (48 Amphibious Assault Vehicles), a Light Armored Reconnaissance Company (Reinforced) (27 Light Armored Vehicles) and a Tank Company (Reinforced) (14 Main Battle Tanks), each drawn from their parent division’s organic type battalion; A combat support battalion equivalent, consisting of a Combat Engineer Company, a Reconnaissance Company (each drawn from their parent division’s organic type battalion), and a Support Company, formed from the parent division’s Headquarters Battalion, consisting of platoons from the Headquarters, Communications, and Truck companies.(copied from Wikipedia) Again this is not your British Airborne unit, sorry....but the USMC has retained the regimental infantry concept since WW2, which is similar in some ways to the regiments of the British Army. Marine units of this type formed the right flank of the drive from Kuwait to Baghdad, and while they did not face the type of weapons system depicted in CMBS, their performance can give you an indication on the uses of light infantry with extra support provided to survive on the modern battlefield. With the help of special amphibious assault vessels maintained by the US Navy, the USMC is one of the few large organizations still capable of inserting into a battlespace from the sea.
    1 point
  15. And some people consider the graphics of this great game meh. It looks awesome IMHO.
    1 point
  16. Ohh Yeah ! this looks really cool... Looking forward to playing this one too...
    1 point
  17. Kieme(ITA)

    Kieme's modding corner

    Kieme CMBS C&C icons New colorful icons for the c&c display. Download: https://app.box.com/s/unopornpkl4jwm4reukp4v1fcdgnr6qn Preview:
    1 point
  18. Well, I think light infantry's strong point, at least in the strategic perspective, is mobility. Case in point - a brigade from the 82nd Airborne can deploy worldwide in 24 hours. An Armored Brigade Combat Team from, say, the 1st Cavalry Division, will get to Europe in a week or so, hopefully before T-90s are camping out in Kiev - and that's probably an optimistic assessment. Also, I think most countries retain significant amounts of light infantry. Most of the Baltic states only have Light infantry (well, one decided to be nice and give its brigade a ride in ex-German M113s). The US Army will have 13 Infantry Brigade Combat Teams by the end of 2017, and although these are equipped with a decent amount of HMMWVs (52 with M2 HMGs/Mk.19s and 28 with TOW-2s), at the end of the day the maneuver battalions are going to have to take Hill 284 or whatever the old fashioned way - on foot. And not all of them are airborne qualified - I think only 8 active duty IBCTs are airborne. The US Army national Guard had even more IBCTs. So Light Infantry remain a staple, even in the most splurged upon military in the world. Of course, just because you can get a Brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division to say, Ukraine, the day after a Russian Armored Corps rolled across the border doesn't help you if you can't effect the situation on the ground. In that sense, our Airborne Brigade (US Airborne Brigades, are, by the way, organized on the exact same lines as other US Infantry Brigade Combat Teams - or pretty close to it) would essentially be a delaying force (the more blunt term is speedbump) to buy time for the M1A2s and such to deploy from CONUS. If you have ground to trade for time, Light Infantry would play to their strengths and armor/mechanized force's weakness. That is, make defensive positions in urban areas/rough terrain, where armor will be much easier to deal with and you can face the enemy on more even terms. That is another of Light Infantry's key advantages - while the 60 ton M1 Abrams will get bogged down in that swamp real good, Private Miller and his M4/AT4 can cross it just fine (just don't expect him to be real happy about it.) If you really have ground to trade for time, well, if I had A US Infantry Brigade, I would use my Javelin ATGMs to full effect. IBCTs have an ungodly amount of Javelins - 76 to be exact . I would deploy in a good ATGM position, and pop off a missile at the first BMP I see. While the OPFOR armor would probably have to deploy and search for your ATGM team, you can hop in your HMWWV (the FGM-148 is Fire and Forget, so once you pull that trigger you can skedaddle) and fall back past another missile team that is in another good position. While they give OPFOR another surprise when they reorganize and come back down the road, you find another good position and set up. This causes the OPFOR to have to keep deploying and wasting time. Even if OPFOR takes a "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" approach, you can still attrit them a good bit and have the odds a bit more in your favor when they reach your prmary defensive line. This whole approach, of course, assumes, you have ground to trade to time, and I doubt most politicians would like that option. So again, Light Infantry will deploy in easily defensible positions for them - broken terrain, woods, urban areas, bottlenecks, etc. Of course, the problem with that is that the enemy might not want to attack your modern rendition of Stalingrad, and instead elect to make your little town into a modern day Bastogne - without Patton coming to the rescue. While Light Infantry are strategically agile, Theatre and tactically wise they are sluggish compared to a Combined Arms Battalion (well, maybe not logistics wise, but maneuver wise). So you have to deploy them where you know the enemy is going to attack, which, unfortunately, may not be the most easily defensible position. So next scenario - the US III Corps is in Theatre and is duking it out with OPFOR. What's a light infantryman to do now? Now they would act like a fire brigade - kinda like the 101st Airborne in WWII. They would reinforce buckling areas of the front, due to their mobility (am assuming we give them trucks for this part of course) and act as speed bumps against any OPFOR breakthroughs, and buy time for heavy forces to reposition. Also, they would be used to attack broken terrain and urban centers, where we don't want to send our heavy armor in or want to use them in a more effective manner - like going for the jugular of that Russian armored division. As for attacking, I think NTC has shown plenty that sending light infantry, Strykers or no, against armor is asking for a bloodbath. Ok, so I have rambled on enough. Here's the bullet point answer - Many countries still have light infantry in significant quantities -Light Infantry's strong pointers are strategic mobility and abilty to move comparatively easily through rough/impassable terrain -Infantry can give armor and mech a hard time in urban/rough terrain. -Can deploy as theater fire brigades - assuming you have the assets to move them in a timely manner. If you need clarification (or want to tell me I am an idiot and have no idea how to use Light Infantry - which is perfectly fine with me!) just let me know. Oh, and I, uh, kinda forgot about your "British Airborne Unit as an example." I used an American IBCT since I'm more familiar with it. I guess the difference with the brits would be less javelins - 16th Air Assault Brigade only has 27 Javelins, I believe Oh, and as disclaimer, this was written by a 19 year old with no (current - but that's going to change in 14 days) military experience. So I could be completely wrong.
    1 point
  19. Ok, just finished...read...just quit cuz I was getting my butt kicked... However, here are my observations AND SOME SPOILERS: 1) New scenario is much better paced, more balanced for OOBs (more on that later) and the action picks up very quickly. As I said, I like the sniper/recon platoon for the first period to try and reduce the enemy forces before my main body shows up. 2) So I got cocky, quickly captured X-Ray and Bravo then sent my tanks off to capture Alpha thinking I could hold off the counter attack I knew was coming with my CAAT and Fire Support. BIG BIG mistake. The Mech Company/Tank Company, whatever, came hell for leather and overran my butt in no time, wiping out my CAAT and the infantry holding X-ray...stupid move, should have left my tanks there to absorb the counterattack...I even saw 'em coming from the control tower but couldn't get CAS and artillery on them fast enough...DAMN those T-72s can hurry. 3) I really like this scenario...gonna try a third time and not get so cocky...leave a good tank/infantry ambush to wipe out the counter attack...I know, not what the player trying this for the first time may do, but NOW of course honor demands I wipe these bastards out. Really well done...I think this is ready for prime time...to be fair your briefing does warn about a counter attack but DAMN when it comes, it's like a freakin' cavalry charge of T-72s.... I would launch it...try and keep some interest in CMSF...I still play it at least as much as CMBS or any of the other titles.
    1 point
  20. Did someone say 5th Panzer Division? Looks sweeping and legendary, George. I am really looking forward to playing all your latest stuff once I am done this mod from East Front Hell. Mord.
    1 point
  21. Likin' the graphic treatment on this shot, Bud.
    1 point
  22. Check your E-mail, Boris, and you'll learn that what you're seeing is routine rabbit abatement. Everyone sent me a turn and was just E-mailed one in reply. Fate and I are vying with one another for the military ineptitude award, Boris and I are barely in contact, and Tero and I are shooting each other when and where the opportunity presents itself. Pretty underwhelming so far, though. Regards, John Kettler
    -1 points
  23. Received turns from and replied to Tero and Boris. Tero's doing evil things, while Boris's men apparently will be cooking dinner later and were really on coffee break. They've returned to the fray. Regards, John Kettler
    -1 points
  24. Vanir Ausf B, How's this grab you? Taken from here. aw_mm's #11, dated 8/26/14. I have never seen the like of the kind of detail. During the Cold War, analysts got all excited because the someone managed to image the underside of a T-72 turret, for some reason upside down at the tank plant, allowing determination of the cavity size for special armor in the turret front. This makes that look like a nonevent by comparison. "ERA is highly efficient per thickness - afaik it is the most space efficient armor. The reactive elements in the Soviet Kontakt-1 ERA consisted of a 7 mm thick layer of explosive sandwiched between two 2 mm thick steel plates (so the total thickness is 11 mm) which can reduce the penetration of a missile warhead by 400 mm. The optimal protection is achieved when the ERA is sloped, but at the roof this is not necessary, because pretty much all top-attack weapons strike from an angle (except artillery bomblets). The only thing I was able to find about the actual Soviet/Russian ERA used on their MBTs is this picture from a Russian news website/blog: It shows trials done during the development of the enhanced roof protection in 1983. The (1) marks the 50 mm thick anti-radiation layer installed inside the tank. (2) shows the 40 mm thick roof armor made of medium hardness steel. (3) is a 2 mm thick steel layer for holding all stuff together. (4) is a 80 mm thick polyurethane layer and (6) marks a 10 mm thick armor plate of high hardness steel under which a Kontakt-1 reactive element is located. So the whole array would be: 50 mm anti-radiation liner - 40 mm thick roof armor - 80 mm polyurethane - 2 mm steel - 7 mm explosive - 2 mm steel - 10 mm high hardness steel or 191 mm of armor of which 90 mm are part of the turret roof and 101 mm applique armor. According to said blog (if Chrome translated everything correctly) the armor was tested against an artillery bomblet with a penetration of 200 mm (dent in the armor marked with (8) ) and was able to resist it. Such a bomblet strikes perpendicular at the armor, against a missile like Javelin which will strike at an angle a protection of 400 to 500 mm could be expected in my opinion. Still this wouldn't be enough to deal with the Javelin missile, but then again it is a prototype armor from 1983. I'd expect at least the T-90 (1992) or T-90A (2005) to have upgraded roof armor." Regards, John Kettler
    -1 points
  25. grunt_GI, If you dislike the briefing font size, I strongly suggest you completely avoid the QB screens for Human force selection. The point size is even smaller, I believe, and the text isn't even white against black, making for murky, hard to read visual presentation. I hate, hate, hate style over functionality, and that, I've experienced several times now, is exactly the case here. Font selection is critical, too, when working with small-tiny point size, because readability simply isn't there with spindly fonts. My doctor's office, for example, has a business card with tiny, spindly pale blue type against white card stock, resulting in a card in which the vital info is practically indecipherable. And because graphics designers have, I've found the hard way many times, perverse streaks a mile wide, the second and third tier info is black on white, in a much larger point size and more eye friendly font! Despite being corrected to 20/20, my almost new trifocals (Drat! Now they know I'm not 20!), which allowed me to read with ease the tiniest type (printer's info) on the bottom of the reading acuity card, coupled with my brain in its current state, generally aren't equal to by Human force selection job, which is why I fight primarily in Computer Selects mode. This has been a pain, given I sometimes get more bodies than vehicle seats, the wrong fire support and other grief, but I least I don't get eyestrain and a headache from not only trying to read the force lists but navigate what to me is a difficult UI. How I miss the one from CMx1 in which I could both see clearly and navigate it with ease. What to you is a nit is to me a major problem which seriously limits my options in playing QBs. I really hope BFC addresses our respective issues, and I wish there wasn't small pale gray type here, too. It's a picnic, though, compared to the QB screen! Regards, John Kettler
    -1 points
  26. You seem to be quick with personal judgements. Where did I write about problems finding mods? Have you never read this or any other forum? Even PBEM is already too complicated for many customers. My point of view is taking the DAUs into account. And I thought I mentioned several facts? Is it beyond your imagination that someone can think outside the fanboy-box. Because the current system is good enough for you, doesn't make it any more accessible for the average customer. I raised several arguments why I think the current implementation sucks - btw which arguments did you reply to when you are talking about throwing the baby out with the water? For many customers even installing mods in a special folder is already too difficult. I also often cannot understand the reflexes on this forum: instead to think about the additional possibilities and optionalities, the mindset of fanbois is strictly binary. Transparency is one of the main design principles of user friendly software. If something is not transparent, it is rejected by customers. And searching for mods that fit to a scenario and installing them separately is such a case. But this doesn't make the problem go away: the average customer will never see your mods currently, although he has played scenarios from you. How many CM customers even have heard about mod-tags? How many of them can install mods? How many know, how the tag system works? How could this system have been tried, if the game doesn't check if a subfolder exists? And Kohlenklau, if the current system was such a big success, how high is the percentage of scenarios with dedicated mods? I guess even 10% is way to high! Now lets take into account how many are downloading and installing the mods. You probably end up in the low single digit percentages... Great system?
    -2 points
  27. agreed, it is one thing to have a discussion on differences in perspective. It is another to have that crap start getting thrown again. If I am a "fanboy" because I disagree with you, then well... .. I can't say what I want to here without offending forum rules but it is a verb and implies the use of teeth. The argument itself is contradictory. If sticking all your mods in one folder is too hard, how is having multiple folders gonna be easier? Self contradictory and rabidly argumentative. I can get that at DMV, I don't need it here. And I don't think our community is so inept as apparently Carl does. Folks have been modding CM games for 16 years.
    -2 points
×
×
  • Create New...