Webwing

There might be a little something that should have been deleted but got to the final build of the British Forces module. If it is there then... There is a texture called *gear-cammo.bmp*. If you open this texture you will notice it has a totally black Alpha channel. This texture can be used to add netting cammou to the CVR(T)s, Scimitar, Spartan, etc. You would need to make a new Alpha channel in the way that you can find in the *gear-cammo2.bmp*. This one is used for WMIK. Play with it to see what´s the best configuration to make it look more natural. Have fun! -

Yep, damaged bar armour are used at random to add variety. Sometimes all neat and new, sometimes the front is damaged, sometimes the side and back, etc. -

I tried to get to the same standard as the stuff that was already in the game. A huge challenge, for sure. I have looked into models made for many, many games and I haven´t seen this amount of detail even in first person games and simulators where you really see the models up close. Battlefront has set a very high standard with the base game and Marines, which did not make my work easy! It was a joy and a nightmare at the same time! Anyway, thanks for that. I really appreciate it! For the part that concerns me, that is! It´s really team work. And what a great team. A lot of people helping to make sure everything was accurate. Even asking me to put a BV on the back door of the IFVs!!! You know, a BV is crucial to British morale! By the way rear view mirrors are Marco´s specialty! -

Angryson, Great stuff. Notice that the UK has exclusive icons, even when the image is basically the same like a mortar for instance. This means you could add something to the icons to differentiate them from the US. A little dot or something. This way it would be easy to see were is the US and were is the UK forces. Just an idea! -

Hm, but then the issue might be incompatibility of v1.2 with your on going Pbem games which are probably v1.1. In this case, just deleting the files will not help since the base game has been upgraded to v1.2 The only solution would be to re install the game, and upgrade it to whatever version you had prior to installing v1.2 that came with the module. - You can have 2 version of the game in your hard drive. One with the updated v1.2 and the British Forces Module, and another older one for you to finish your on going PBEM games.

He will be glad to know someone got it. -

BillyR, Here are the two loops from the Abrams named as Challenger2. Atenticon: Those ARE NOT the Challenger2 sounds, they are the original Abrams sounds remamed! What you need to do is simply download this files and place them on the Z folder inside the Data folder in the root directory of Combat Mission:Shock Force. Have fun! http://www.mediafire.com/file/zntwwkzm2zm/vehicle loop engine idle challenger2.wav http://www.mediafire.com/file/zj535qinztv/vehicle loop move challenger2.wav -

I´m not sure why you would want to do that! But anyway, AFAIK you would have to delete the files for the module manually. There is a file in the data folder for the module, Marines or UK. Then there is another one in the Modules folder. Then some other files in the root folder. Then the scenarios that come with the module... -

Ho, ho... FMB you want to make players die of overdose or somefink? A big campaign, 30 + standalone scenarios, countless new QB maps.... and now this!!!!!!! I need to find the time to play this one! --

FMB, You forgot the Bulldog! Bulldogs have probably similar levels of protection as a Warrior, with ERA and all. Although not the same firepower. They are definitely better than the CVR(T)s. -

This scenario is from the great George Mc. From what I remember back story is something like this: Post war, Syrian army units are being trained by the US with US equipment. They switch sides and align themselves with the insurgents. Thus it is Syrian guys with US hardware vs UK. A lot of fun I have to say! -

There is actually one scenario included in the module which is UK vs US. --

44? really!? Oh, yes... he he.... true! ---

Point that 45 somewhere else, I´m just jocking!

I´m feeling lucky! -

Awesome stuff! Thanks. -

Everything is sooooo quiet. -

And, can he shout or what! -

Oh, you want to confuse things again flamingknives! -

A picture might help here. As flamingknives mentioned not all sections are made equal. Although a *standard* section has 8 men the armoured infantry section has 7. This is the section that fits in the Warrior. That is 7 men plus 3 crew. -

I´ve got to say that a lot of new animations were made specifically for the British Module. Of course not all, the wall jumping is an example of a new animation that is there for soldiers of any nationality. Mostly the issue with the British module was due to the configuration of the SA80 which has the clip behind the pistol grip. This makes holding the weapon for walking, firing and basically everything quite different from holding the standard US rifle. There is also other issues, like the mortar animation. The 51mm mortar is generally used by a single soldier and is held in one hand while the other hand uses a trigger to fire the mortar. That obviously required a new animation. -

Interesting that it does not use the toe armour, that seems to accompany the upgrade. -

Interesting discussion. I don´t think it is possible to have scenarios designed that will address all styles of play at once. The requirements for good H2H scenarios, as ASL Veteran noted, are very specific. For instance larger set up areas. The replayability issue has more to do with the nature of H2H than with set up zones or anything else. Multiplayer gives you a lot more variety/replayability than playing against an AI. Regarding user made scenarios done by the community, the reason for so few H2H scenarios is probably the fact that H2H scenarios are less personal, and the designer has less control. So although it takes less time to make, it is also less rewarding. Mission designers make scenarios for pleasure and the fact that they make their work available for the community is a side effect of this. Although it is doubtlessly very rewarding to have others playing your scenarios the main drive is the pleasure you get from making them in the first place. Most designers also have specific situations/battles in mind and they want to have as much control as possible over it. This is no good for H2H scenarios. However most scenarios are done that way and we end up with very few H2H scenarios to play. In terms of community made scenarios one possible solution would be for designers to release a H2H version of their missions. However it might be better of you to just open whichever scenario you like and tweak it yourself for that purpose. As long as you don´t make it public and only use them for yourself I don´t see any problem. You can even ask the designer permission to use it and the release the H2H version giving credit to the original designer. The conversion would be very straitforward. Get rid of all the AI orders (not mandatory). Make the setup areas bigger. Add more forces for Red as needed. That´s it. One of the great things that sets CM:SF apart from the other 3D wargames it it´s powerful but user friendly editor. You paid for it, so you might as well give it ago. You will be surprised how much you can do in very little time. There is another side to this story which are the scenarios release by Battlefront with the modules and games. In the official modules there is a concern to address all sorts of play styles. Small battles, big battles, infantry intensive, armor intensive, etc. Standalone missions use most all the units available in the module. You might even find Blue x Blue missions. The huge majority, if not all of them, have AI plans for both sides. Also H2H should be there in a good proportion. I can tell you that for the British module for instance you should find many scenarios that were specifically designed to be played H2H. -

WWI, in games has always been overshadowed by WW2 and has never been done in a satisfactory way. No company has given it the attention it deserves. I understand the argument that the leadership was below average and that it was a waste of lives but you could say the same about any conflict to some extend. It depends mostly from what perspective you are looking at it. Personally I think it would be very interesting to do it with the CM2 engine. And apart from the historical engagements there is a fantastic amount of what if scenarios that could be created with the editor. The combination of weapons and primitive tanks and vehicles of that period would make for very interesting tactical challenges.

That´s really bad news for everybody. I´m sorry to hear it. All the best to you and thanks for what you´ve done. -