SgtMuhammed

Amen to that brother. It is rather hard to coordinate your arty with your infantry advance when you don't know when it is coming. Maybe not an exact timer but I need something more than "Busy." Of course I may be a bit bitter, I just lost an entire platoon because I miss timed my advance with a Strike Eagle attack.

Are the Buff Howards part of your regiment or just have a similar name? I always loved training with the Royal Army.

Have you tried "Clear Target" on the pop smoke line? Does it stay after you have already popped smoke?

Seeing the guys overthere still makes me feel bad that I'm not a part of that world anymore. If you ever need a 40 year old squad leader give me a call. I'll bring my own kit.

Nice LT. Beats the hell out of my Platoon picks by the castle ruins in Hohenfels. Stay safe buddy and good hunting.

Hey, I sincerly hope they prove me wrong. Regardless, I like the game and I know I will like it even more later. I guess seeing these guys looking like the men I had the honor to lead makes me a little prickly about watching them act like idiots. (Not that I didn't have a few of those.)

Thanks Mike. It is always fascinating, to me at least, to hear how other militaries work. I remember being a reservist when our monthly drill consisted of avoiding the CSM in between cleaning something at the armory. Probably a lot different now, that was in the early 90's. Angryson, I always considered 6-502 (Berlin) my home. Even after they shut it down.

I think we should be more careful about what we name our threads. I had no idea what this thread was about and only looked at it because it was mentioned in another thread. Anyway; So far most people here have made very valid points. Some, I feel, are oversimplifying a real problem while others are being overly pessimistic in their outlook. Is 1:1 the future of computer gaming in any form? Of course it is. The history of computer gaming is a quest for increased realism and fidelity. One day I believe it will be possible to have wargames that allow you to plan grand strategy and command squads in the same battle. Eventually even farther down than that. Say a FPS that gives the player control of every aspect of WWII. Of course I fully expect that future desktops will have the computing power of CRAY super-computers. So the future of 1:1 isn't really a subject of debate. Like Steve said, it is here to stay. Is it suitable for a company level wargame or higher? Yes provided the engine can handle it, and there's the rub. In the future CMSF will be an elementary school project, but we don't play in the future. It is a lot like the Northrop Flying Wing. There was nothing fundamentally wrong with the design but the systems at the time couldn't handle it. 40 years of developement later and the B2 Spirit is testament to the soundness of the basic design. Like that early Flying Wing CMSF will fly and gives us a great representation of what is to come but some things are still beyond what even a high end PC can handle. Right now there is only one thing that 1:1 soldiers do like their RL counterparts; get shot. Actually they do this better than real soldiers by several magnitudes. This is the easy part. Simple equations to track polygons allow our digital troops to get shot. The trickier part is getting them to act like the soldiers they are supposed to represent. I don't care if private Snuffy Smith has a fever or a full canteen but I do care if he can't take cover or climb through a window or enter the door he is told to rather than run out on the street to enter another door in the same building. These are the things I expect the AI to be able to do and if you are going to show me a 150 man company I expect each man in that company to do these things rather than just be able to be shot. I don't expect to be required or even able to give every private his specific orders and to see them carried out robotically but I expect that when I give a squad an order that they will do so with some attempt to do so realisticly. Unfortunately I feel that the current state of computing technology simply doesn't allow this. There is a quantum leap between programing AI for 20 units per company to 150 units per company. Especially when those 150 are acting on orders given to only a few and attempting to interpret those commands and evaluate their environment and react to it in an intelligent fashion. I have faith that BFC will make every effort to resolve this problem as best they can but I also feel that in this area computing power will defeat them. In conclusion (finally I hear you saying), I don't feel that CMSF is fundamentally flawed. I applaud their desire to be on the cutting edge rather than just churning out another cookie cutter like so many other companies do. While I think the path they have chosen is the correct one I think they may have taken that step too soon.

Thanks Hukka, I'll try to run some tests when I get home. If that is a feature it needs to be fixed. A Stryker probably can't push a T72 out of the way but it can definitely move a Toyota.

Thanks Hukka, I'll try to run some tests when I get home. If that is a feature it needs to be fixed. A Stryker probably can't push a T72 out of the way but it can definitely move a Toyota.

Thanks Hukka, I'll try to run some tests when I get home. If that is a feature it needs to be fixed. A Stryker probably can't push a T72 out of the way but it can definitely move a Toyota.

My dad was at an Air Force listening station in Japan. He used to listen to Russian bombers flying out of Vlad.

Rakkasans! You didn't know a Josh Orpen there did you? I think he was with 187 but I don't remember exactly where.

How often do you guys who are reservists in other than U.S. armies train? I know a lot of countries use a smaller standing but a larger reserve component so I was just wondering what the differences are between our systems.

I haven't tried yet but can vehicles not push each other around like in CMx1?

I haven't tried yet but can vehicles not push each other around like in CMx1?

I haven't tried yet but can vehicles not push each other around like in CMx1?

You mean the game? Yes

Guys, I still just don't buy the whole "BFC is selling out to the 'clickfest/realtime' crowd." Even with the improvements in 1.02 this game is nowhere close to other RTS games like C&C or Warcraft. Because of the need to babysit all your units to make sure that they don't charge machineguns like a bunch of Marines* I really have no interest in the RT style and have stuck to entirely turn based. Plus I only really like big battles which are a pain in RT, for me at least. For me the only thing different is that now I can watch the turn resolution instead of the replay. I most often skip the playback as I am usually focused on the most important point during the resolution phase and only need to look at everyone else if something catches me by surprise. I never felt that the CMx1 interface was suited for RT and I still feel the same about CMx2. Where I believe they have sold out is in the eyecandy department. No I don't mean to say that the game is exceptionally pretty but I think they gave in to all the clamoring about 1 to 1 representation of infantry without really being able to deal with the implications. In the old system a company battle gave you less than 20 units that you needed to have act in realistic manor. In a company battle in SF you have around 140 individuals that you need to act in a realistic manor. Right now they only do so in one aspect, they can get shot. With the old system your squad entered the room and began clearing, now parts of your squad enter a room and get shot while waiting for the rest of the squad to enter the room and begin clearing. With the old system of abstractions a squad could enter a building without being forced to go to a door, although they did there too, because it can be abstracted that they are using windows and such. Now with everyone on the battlefield either units use a simple algorithim to locate the entry point, ie. the door, or they are aware, all of them, of the construction of each building. Unfortunately none of us has the computing power necessary to have hundreds of little soldiers acting in according with the plan but also according to how they percieve the battlefield. As you can see I think there are fundamental problems with the game but I just can't see them as being cause by "selling out" to real time. I like the game and I expect it to get better but I feel that much of the criticism has been off target. *You know I love you guys.

My dad was at Langley from 76-79 (Not to sure on the end date). Really nice post. We used to run into Williamsburg and Yorktown all the time.

My guys engaged a BTR with AT4s. In fact they did so from about 200 meters against a moving BTR and hit 3 out of 3 times. They fired 2 after the vehicle was already in flames. Could have been luck but I was a little surprised at their accuracy.

My guys engaged a BTR with AT4s. In fact they did so from about 200 meters against a moving BTR and hit 3 out of 3 times. They fired 2 after the vehicle was already in flames. Could have been luck but I was a little surprised at their accuracy.

My guys engaged a BTR with AT4s. In fact they did so from about 200 meters against a moving BTR and hit 3 out of 3 times. They fired 2 after the vehicle was already in flames. Could have been luck but I was a little surprised at their accuracy.

Just a quick rant. You can catch my rant in the "What the patch didn't fix" thread. The map is nice. Is there any way to put some vehicles or something on it to represent the airport equipment from the briefing. I have barely started playing with the editor so I'm not sure if this is possible. Force balance seems to be ok but problems with the TACAI put the Americans at a major dissadvantage, especially since they are required to use CQB against the terminal. The lack of smoke is supposed to be made up for by the superior American NODs but there seems to be little actual difference. This may be a bug but it seemed that the Syrian units were able to engage at whatever range the Americans were. I am rapidly reaching the conclusion that it will be impossible to make good infantry heavy scenarios until the TACAI is fixed. This one definitely has potential but I believe that the game itself is holding it back.

On a more technical note. I noticed several units who were supposed to be walking beside a large concrete wall seemed to be floating above the wall instead. I also noticed that the large concrete wall seems to be totally transparent to small arms fire. Several squads taking cover behind the wall were decimated by small arms from several tens of meters away. I purposely sent units to see if my perception was correct. It was.