kipanderson

Hi, Ok…now I have had way more use of the game I still think it is outstanding… all I expect from Battlefront at its best . I have been playing the Brandenbug scenario as Blue in Veteran mode, Real Time. CMSF does everything I hoped CMX2 would do. No point me listing all the features I like about it as you all have the game and can judge for yourselves. Each to their own… but I cannot understand how any CMX1 fan/veteran could be anything but happy with CMSF. Does all CMX1 did in more detail only better. As I get more accustomed to RT will even be happy playing huge scenarios soon. Congratulations all round… looking forward to a long line of CMX2 wargames… WWII and post WWII please . All good fun, All the best, Kip. PS Am spending hours playing CMSF when I should be doing other things .

Hi, Does playing in Elite mode take more PC power than playing in Veteran? I think my system does less well in Elite, still cope, but seems to be nearer its limits in Elite. Thanks, All the best, Kip.

Hi, Is the underlying armour modelling as detailed in CMSF/CMX2 as in CMX1? On the face of it there has been a huge reduction in the detail of the armour modelling from CMX1. We no longer see the penetration figures for given weapons and rounds nor the thickness/type of armour for each part of an AFV. Just four or five ratings from excellent to poor. But under the hood is the armour modelling as detailed in CMX2 as in CMX1? Is the exact type/thickness/slope at the point struck….and so on… still taken into account? How is armour penetration modelling in CMX2… behind the scenes? All good fun, All the best, Kip.

gibsonm/Steve/rune, do any of you guys want me to send you the two game files that show the difference between the AT14 performance downhill and on flatter terrain. By the same crew in the same game, just that AT team in a different location in the two games. All good fun, All the best, Kip. PS. I "think" there is a tendancy for other ATGMs to have the same problem, not sure yet.

Hi, I too have missed smoke… just thought I failed to find it as there are so many new features to learn. If there really is no smoke that is a big problem. I am one of those who are a fan of the CMX2 engine and CMSF…. but no smoke is a bit of a shocker . In any WWII/post WWII battlefield you need it. In modern warfare it is a must. All the best, Kip.

Hi, Slat armour will only stop the older designed rounds/warheads used by the RPG7…. ‘70s/’80s designs.. The modern ones dating from the ‘90s have a 105mm tandem warhead and can easily deal with any slat armour. They are very powerful. All the best, Kip.

Hi, I have read the comments of Russian designers on this topic. They are well aware that nine out of ten of their ATGMs will be fired at targets offer than AFVs. I am sure in other armies the same is true even if your training staff try to get you not to use them too liberally against infantry. The British use Javelin routinely against infantry/Taliban. All good fun, All the best, Kip.

Rune, The AT14 is laser guided in this particular location there is certainly a problem. The same crew, in another location, even when half suppressed and taking causalities Hit 50% of the time. But “never” hit in this location. All good fun, All the best, Kip.

(Note… this is not a spoiler as only used the Brandenbug map, not units.) Hi, When an AT14 ATGM team is placed in a certain location, firing down hill but with a great view of his targets, he misses every time. Must have seen him fire twenty missiles over a number of games, all misses. When I then modded the scenario and changed his location, still same distance but not down hill any more, he did devastating work. Killed with about 50% of his missiles in spite of being partially suppressed and his team taking causalities. Have repeated the tests many times. ( For my own records, scenario Brandenbug Mod and Brandenbug Mod2, 3rd AT platoon/2nd section/B team. ) All the best, Kip.

Hi, Yes… CMSF has turned out to be a stunner… way more interesting than I expected. I knew it would be good, with a great engine, never thought it would have this much potential . From all the Jane’s journals and such that I consume I knew that ‘90s Russian AT weapons would be a huge threat even to the latest/heaviest of western armour but there is no replacement for actually watching in glorious techno-colour just how much of a leveller down current generation Russian AT weapons are . Added to the above the artwork and modelling is shockingly good. I remember how surprised I was when CMBB appeared to see how it recreated the look of Russia, the landscape, houses and such. CMSF does the same, but even better , for the Middle East. Great stuff…. Has forgotten just how much fun CM can be, and no Borg Spotting anymore . All great fun, All the best, Kip.

Hi, Was playing the Attack on Brandenbug scenario, great scenario by the way , and assaulted a US squad from one roof top to the ground floor level house next door. Three men from the US squad then ran through the air from their roof top, twelve feet above the yard, only coming down to ground level at the door to the target house they were assaulting. One US soldier did do things correctly by first going down to ground level in his starting house then running across the yard to the next house. Stunning game…. All the best, Kip. PS. Is there a bug thread… cant see one…

Hi, Just a quick post to congratulate those involved in the art work and shipped maps. When I first downloaded CMSF I went to the editor and started to build a large test scenario to see just how things work. My map was nothing to write home about . However, I then loaded and reviewed all of the shipped maps and was stunned, they screamed the Middle East and Lebanon…. I have never seen Syria but am told it is very like Lebanon in most parts. The mixture of the artwork, the modelling and the map design brought it all to life…stunning…I really felt I was watching a movie from Syria. Congratulations… All good fun, All the best, Kip.

Hi, CMSF is everything I hoped for . If you go back three years or so all was talk of “what CMX2 should be”…happily for me it soon became clear from Steve that the scale and scope of CMX1 was to remain. Just more detailed modelling. Exactly what I whished for. CMSF has turned out to be just that. Could not happier . CMSF is by a huge margin the number one wargame/simulation out there. I have tried them all, thrown money at the problem in the hope of finding another game to rival CMX1 while waiting for CMX2…. nothing, bit nothing comes close. CMSF, like CMX1, is so high quality it is a form of military history, future history in this setting, but you get the point. That is why I am such a fan of all things CM, it is strictly from the military history standpoint that I come to CM. I play no “PC games”. Great to have another version of CM to play with…looking forward to more of the same… Did someone mention the Eastern Front . Congratulations to all, All the best, Kip.

Hi, Operations were also my favoured way of playing CM . Great to hear that the text files used for campaigns are so flexible that one can create ones own “operations” by having a campaign on one or two maps. In fact the editing of campaigns makes a huge difference in a long list of ways in term of the potential of CMSF. It has always been my view that CM is way too good a simulation to use simply for one-off battles. Operations and campaigns are the future . All good fun, All the best, Kip.

Hi, I agree with others, given that CMX2 is meant to be more focused and limited in scope that is a very impressive list just for one side. Will be fun . All the best, Kip. PS. I am off course hoping that in a later module they will find time to add just a small number of the very latest Russian AFVs/ kit.... but I must not be too greedy .

MikoyanPT, Agree very much with your list. They are the sort of systems that would greatly increase the cost of entry for a wealthy, NATO style invader. It is often forgotten just how fragile an asset air-power is in that it takes so long to replace losses. Just a 1%- 2% loss rate pre-mission would be unacceptable/sustainable for any NATO country. Some in the military press believe the latest Russian system could achieve that. All the best, Kip.

Hi, Of course I look forward to CMSF and will be looking to build campaigns as soon as I get my hands on it . I can imagine all sorts of political assumptions that could lead to very interesting challenges for all. But if Battlefront could just add a handful of the latest Russian toys to some module it would help matters . One only has to assume that Russia throw its latest air-defence systems at Syria and US airpower suddenly becomes far less useable. I have read in Jane’s that Russia’s latest generation air-defences are just as effective as their latest anti-armour weapons. When playing CMBB my favourite period is mid-war onwards due to the fact that “overall” both sides were more closely matched at the tactical level. Will enjoy CMSF straight out of the box as much as any. Importantly all I hear about the features of the engine are spot-on...could not be better . And Battlefront want to do the setting....which matter hugely. All good fun, All the best, Kip.

Steve, “That appears to be your attitude since we first announced CM:SF and I'm sad to see it persist so long. No matter, the game itself will show you how wrong you are. And if it doesn't, well... it's your loss.” Steve… don’t take things so to heart.. … I still greatly look forward to CMSF and will be one of the first to download a copy on the 27th . CMX2 is exactly what I hoped for. If you go back five years all was discussion of what CMX2 should be and I have been very lucky that the scale, scope etc of CMX2 is spot on what I wished for. I even like the idea of being able to play some smaller games in RT. However… it just happens that my personal enthusiasm, in a perfect world, is for high-intensity war between opponents in “the same ball park” in technology. Do bear in mind that not all of even the most unhinged CM fans will love equally the setting of all your CMX2 releases. My first love, and yours I believe if it makes commercial sense, is WWII Eastern Front. Next I would go for WWII NWE and lastly Cold War. But still I greatly look for ward to CMSF. Importantly you guys want to do CMSF. All good fun, All the best, Kip.

Hi, We really do need a module of the latest Russian kit, terrible shame if we do not get it . We are anyway dealing with a fictional scenario here so to assume that the Russians decide to ship there latest kit to threatened Syria is no more fanciful. Russia had $365 billion in reserves last time I looked. If it decide to it could easily finance the Syrians. Assuming the Russians shipped their latest air-defence systems would in itself help even the odds a lot. Then assume they shipped their latest ground systems and we are looking at a far more interesting set of scenarios. In my very prejudiced view . As the logic makes sense, I am optimistic it will happen . Greatly looking forward to CMSF regardless... All the best, Kip.

Hi, “I've often wondered why BFC has been so visibly opposed to the idea of a 1970-80's 'Fulda Gap' title.” I agree…they are strange people . To answer the Commissar’s question on how K-5 works. It is internal, not external, reactive armour. The plates do not explode away off the surface of the tanks is in first generation ERA. K-5 works roughly like this. There is an outer covering of armour that will stop most smaller rounds, even many medium rounds. Under it there are two or more plates which when struck by either HEAT or kinetic rounds will slide. It is this sliding action that absorbs the energy of the round. Remember that behind the K-5 there is a full set of standard, modern laminate, fiber glass and steel armour as well. There are explosives used in K-5, but only very small amounts. Long-rod penetrators need to have their forces perfectly lined up nose to tail to work. “Slide” the nose just a little and all is lost . All good fun, All the best, Kip.

Hi, I expect to try a bit of everything to start with... but using CM in operations is my first love...hence campaigns. There is very good news on this front as reports make clear one can edit the text files that are used to build the campaigns. So using the shipped editor to build the battles and then stringing them together in text files to build campaigns will keep me amused for months... until the Normandy release . I also expect to play a lot of blue on blue and red on red. Am hoping some of the latest Russian kit will make it into a later module... would add a lot in my very prejudiced view . Greatly looking forward to CMSF, All the best, Kip.

Hi, yes... I can confirm that the reports do come from Janes. I subscribed to Janes Defence Weekly, plus one of their monthly mags in the early '90s and remember similar reports very clearly. Their AGMs, anti-air missiles and "active" tanks defence systems of the '90s all tended to preform as advertised by the Russians. As do their air-to-air missiles. Anyone who went up against '90s/"current" generation Russian kit would find things very different from Gulf War I and II. If the kit were available in enough numbers. The Russians no longer give it away . Defence Update, the Israeli "Janes" raves about Russians '90s and later kit . All very good fun, all the best, Kip. PS BTW they have now moved on from K-5...K-5 dates back to 1985.

SGT_56M, thanks for the information... Helps to know these things, even more to look forward to Thanks, All the best, Kip.

Hi, Sounds great... good to hear that it may not be as one sided as I feared. Greatly looking forward to CMSF. All the best, Kip.

Hi, it is the main stream WWII battels that do the trick for me. Eastern Front, Feb'44 Korsun Pocket. All the best, Kip. BTW... for Eastern Front Korsun Pocket is quite mainstream...