SgtMuhammed

I have started a map making thread in the scenario design forum. So far I have gotten a couple good tips and hope for more.

You could send an email to Charles about specifics like programing language. I don't think it has ever really come up in the forum. Most people here don't really care how it is done just that it is done well.

Nice job.

They don't do that anymore. Squads actually act like they do in the game. Formations, cover, pfffft, real men need not such things.

The discussions from BFC have made it clear that this wasn't simply a major upgrade of CMx1. It may have started with that general idea but it rapidly became an entirely new system.

Thanks guys. Next week I will be able to play around with it again since the semester will be over. It actually looks pretty good now but it could be better.

Wow John, that took you hours to type and recover? I have to say I was looking for more.

I think it is random. Like having damaged or immobile tanks come back. I think each system has a certain chance that it can be temporarily repaired, firing pin removed, or road wheel missing, etc., rather than really broken. As far as I know there is no way to influence this. I have seen bogged tanks removed after a battle and KO'ed tanks with one crew member come back for more.

I haven't seen a thread dedicated to designing maps just yet so since I have a couple questions I though I would start one. I have been designing a map based on one of my old 1:50,000 maps of Hohenfels. It looks good but my hills are a little more stepped than I would like. I have been putting in all the contour lines from the map but was thinking that maybe I should try using fewer set lines and instead letting the smoothing software build the terrain. How have you guys had the most success? Also, I have noticed that there appear to be random changes in elevation in areas that I haven't worked on yet. Will these go away once I have the map completed?

I thing it is just the computer making up its mind about what actually happened to the crew. Several times I have seen a tank get hit and replaced by a crew icon, the a couple seconds later the icon will vanish and there will be x's all over the vehicle. There seems to be a bit of a lag.

Wow, there were some really, shall we say "strange" design decisions made with this game. So much for simulating light infantry.

Right now I don't have a lot of time with school and all but even when I do I don't just have to play like I did with CMx1. It has nothing to do with the subject matter but rather the execution. I have been playing around with the editor and am working on my first scenario for this one so maybe that will bring some draw back to it for me. As it stands now, I just wait for patches so I don't feel like I totally wasted my money.

When I was at Ft. Lewis, 1st SFG used to jump out of Chinooks all the time. Actually I have seen them jump out of pretty much anything they can get into the air, including balloons.

Then the poor animal suffers for the hours it may take for the vet to get to you and tell you what you knew in the first place.

Interesting how so many people think that only the people who post on this board bought or play this game. Does anyone have any actual sales figures? Most of the complaints are by people who have some sort of idea of how things are actually supposed to work. For most gamers the fact that they can play with all the toys they see on CNN is good enough.

Nearly everything that people enjoy has an element of tragedy in it. Even a beautiful sunset is dreaded as the end of the day by some. Using unconventional tactics against military targets is perfectly valid. No body wants a fair fight. The reason American forces want to face an enemy straight up is because we know it would be decidedly unfair. Unfortunately the enemy is often not stupid enough to play by our rules. So you adapt and keep fighting. Now putting bombs in the middle of a civilian market, that is cowardice.

Small, compact, perfect for covert operations.

One thing I that bugs me about a lot of the newer pistols is the trigger safety. I don't know why since my primary safety is my brain, but I just like manual safeties. I have fired the Glock a few times but it just never felt right. I also did a couple qualification ranges with a SIG but everything was just out of reach and just didn't feel right.

Nobody tell me how it ends, I won't be able to read it till after the semester ends.

Because I am tired of the endless complaint threads, lets get into a good old gunfight. Personally my biggest concern is with how it feels in my hand. Unlike many of my fellow soldiers, I have always loved the M9. It just fits my hand better than anything else I have used. The size of the round doesn't bother me as I have always placed my faith in my ability to put rounds where I want them. Of course I would never try to go into combat with a .22 (spare me the M16 remarks) but the 9mm suits me just fine. In the end I feel that it is important to have a weapon that you can operate as an extension of yourself. If you have to think about the weapon itself rather than your target you are putting yourself at a sever dissadvantage. Anyway, that's my opinion.

You know, they have shots for that.

The old Parabellum / Goodale AARs were classic.

Anything in particular you are looking for?

I have to agree. BFC have always been active participants in almost every discussion. Hell, they even drop in on the MBT and the Waffles every once in a while. I am willing to say that they are rather busy, expecially if they are working on a module and a major patch. I may be kidding myself but I consider this community sort of my extended family. I just can't believe they are off somewhere just because.

I find it disheartening that many of the old guard are becoming dissillusioned with not only the game but BFC as well.