hoolaman

Ahh, the backstory of CMSF seems far more plausible now that we know the true terror weapons they possess.

Remember the BFC patch is not compatible with the Paradox version.

A pneumonic? Sounds unhealthy

Try Z and X, I just patched them into your game.

Unless I'm mistaken VISTA is still not an officially supported OS for CMSF.

Where?

Where?

Where?

My suggestion for the UI is to allow the positional hotkey system to actually be used like it was intended, because when it is it can be a very quick and effective way to plot commands. I am using the numpad for this job (as it was originally intended I think), and it is very easy to switch between MCAS tabs because you can use the use of the / and * keys to switch scroll through the positions with only a slight move of your fingertips. This can NOT be done using UIOJKLM,. because the function keys are the way out of reach and do not scroll anyway, they use four keys for four tabs. The other problem is that the camera cannot be scrolled very well unless you use the WASD in combination with it. That is fine, but I can't use the numpad and go all the way over to WASD to scroll the camera, so I suggest abandoning the arrow key LOOK mapping (which is redundant with the RMB anyway) and allow the WASD scroll to be mapped to the arrow keys. That way you could hit NumLock to enable the arrow keys on the numpad and would never need to move your hand from the numpad position. Or it would be a short move to the proper arrow keys.

I have seen plenty of examples of red AI troops crawling one by one into the field of fire of my soldiers. I agree it does make for a unsatisfying game experience. Another complaint I have is the stop-start nature of a AI advance. I haven't really gotten into making AI plans so I can say if this can be done better, but many of the stock scenarios have AI that drives to a point then stops, then does the same again after awhile. It just doesn't seem fluid and real like you expect. I've seen AI Strykers halt for two or three WEGO turns facing 90 degrees to the enemy. They should be more intelligent about their facing and disposition when they pause at a location.

If we're talking UI I think the editor needs a bit of work too. Depending on the formation it seems you have to select a whole battalion and delete what you don't want. It would be better to select only the unit you click on and whatever HQs are neccesary. A bottom up approach instead of a top down approach. As it is you notice the Syrian formations are much less painless because they do not have such a strict chain of command and often selecting the unit you want does not include a whole battalion, allowing selection of single companies without deleting everything. Also the unit menu highlight selector bar in the editor is very dark against the dark background. A lighter highlight would be better.

Why not? CM has always been a sandbox game, and although battlefront are moving to a more user-pays system, the more toys the better! Don't forget the whole scenario is fictional so you can't argue its not a realistic addition. The T-80 would be great too.

The following links have a wealth of knowledge, most with illustrations of modern US army tactics. It features M2 bradley defense and offense tactics, infantry tactics, antiarmor ops, MOUT. So much I haven't read most of it, but if you want a better understanding of tactics in the game it should be of interest. Army correspondence courses

The following links have a wealth of knowledge, most with illustrations of modern US army tactics. It features M2 bradley defense and offens tactics, infantry tactics, antiarmor ops, MOUT. So much I haven't read most of it, but if you want a better understanding of tactics in the game it should be of interest. Army correspondence courses

Here's a few. When a balcony is not rendered (LOD) at the start of a turn, the guys seem to ignore it and run straight out into space. In this one, a squad started acending from the bottom level following the arrow and ended up on the roof. You can just see a guy flying above the road. Both these are reproducable on my system, anyone else still seeing this?

News just in, Syria is not in fact being invaded by BFC sponsored US forces, and is in fact prospering in spite of the dire computer game threat.

I completely agree. The movement orders and even hide do not seem to give any indication as to what stance various individuals will take when they are in position. I have had guys slow-move and then hide and randomly stand bolt upright on a hill crest after spotting or engaging something.

I have only just upgraded my computer and so the full version is only now getting serious play on 1.05. Here are some of the things that jumped out at me while playing. * Syrian enemy infantry running on air at first floor level. On guy was prone outside a building in midair at level 5 and when killed fell to the ground. Happened in "Ambush Tutorial", and I think it has something to do with a LOD rendering of balconies on my specific setup. * The low wall bug seems to add a couple of feet to the height of high walls too. * Use of the AT 4 is instantaneous. ie my guy spotted a BMP, thought about equipping the rocket, equipped the rocket, aimed, fired, hit, put away the rocket in under one second. The Javelin man did not seek to move to a position where he could fire. * Squads reacted to the same exploding BMP by abandoning their safe position on one side of a concrete wall and running around it to seek shelter in a building on the enemy side. * Strykers occupying the same space ie clipping. * LOS calculations do not seem to stick to an action spot until the squad has arrived and regrouped. The squad cannot spot a vehicle right in front of it until the whole squad has settled and the game has "clicked" that they are now on that spot. * The action spot pathing produces strange results where you can't put a squad exactly where you want, they regroup on their action spot, often moving several metres. Vehicles are much better at this, although the action spot pathing still sees them turning their flanks and using non-direct paths. * Syrian recoilless gun crew constanly sought to recrew their weapon despite heavy small arms incoming. This resulted in their being killed one by one despite being in good cover behind a crest. * Last waypoint does not stay selected to give a face command as mentioned in 1.05 release notes. * The LOS line floats at an imprecise point above the cursor. It should track it like a laser. * Enemy Syrians of all varieties seem reluctant to fire their weapons despite my poor tactics giving them all the time in the world to do so. * Units do not recognise that they are under fire unless they are hit. [edited to change AT3 to handheld US AT4] [ January 02, 2008, 05:44 PM: Message edited by: Hoolaman ]

I tend to agree with this, I have read many accounts of small actions in Iraq and Afghanistan (US and Soviet) where the attacking occupying force arrives at the target only to find the enemy gone. Even ragtag amateurs seem pretty good at evading capture and observation, especially when they are operating on their own turf. What tends to happen in the end when they do get pinned and destroyed is that heavier weapons are brought to bear (TOW, Javelin). Or the plan allows them to be blocked or surrounded. On the flipside of course, if the US infantry really has to go in and ferret them out minus HW support, there is a pretty good chance that a spray of AK fire will cut down a few guys. It should be kept in mind that CMSF is supposed to represent a somewhat conventional conflict, so not ever lesson from Iraq will apply.

What the forum could use is an unofficial/official FAQ for gameplay and troubleshooting which lists known issues and known responses. Who wants to volunteer?

Sure there is Rocky gives a bit more protection than Dirt, but (as I've said before) only when the unit is prone. If you really want to spice things up, use the Direct elevation tool and change the heights of individual tiles all over the place. This will make the 8x8 space depress or rise relative to the surrounding tiles. But all of this is rather academic. In real life it is rare to have "basically flat" terrain. Even in Arid environments there are at least subtle undulations in elevation over a significant area. This means that LOS/LOF isn't possible from one spot to all spots on a map at all times. Well, unless you get high enough. And when you do that the small pockmarks and what not in terrain don't amount to much cover anyway. </font>

Excellent thread so far, with a few issues I have been wondering about. Drusus is right, a supressed enemy hiding in a solid trench or foxhole, whether natural or manmade will never be damaged by a distant shooter if they keep their heads down. You would have to manouvre to HW range, or more likely in the US case, bring massive firepower in and level the whole place as I've seen in many Iraq videos. Maybe suppressed guys should get a cover bonus. This is a big issue if you ask me. I think the 8x8 tiles could be made to give satisfying results, but as others have said, that will show the game as far from WYSIWYG. If a map-maker wants to purposely put in lots of small lumps and bumps and ditches smaller than 8m, they cannot really do so. Nor is it clear that they can pick terrain tile X+Y to give the same effect and be sure that the cover abstraction will work out, because nobody knows how it really works. I think people are fine with some abstraction, but at the moment neither solution seems to be possible. Not inherently, but if a map-maker wants to make it so basically flat open terrain has a degree of lumpy cover, I understand there is no way to do it? 8x8 is not a huge area, but not what I would call small either. More often than not I guess a squad would IRL be spread out over more than one 8x8m square, and only a few men would need to find a ditch to lie in. I imagine a "rough terrain" tile that just roughs up what is there (like shell damage) without changing the terrain type and gives a cover bonus. Maybe a "large rocky" tile would be good too. It would also be handy to choose whether terrain slope in a certain area is smoothed or terraced.

No problem. The dust issues is the big one imo because you really can't miss it even if you aren't intending to cheat. It also gives you such precise position speed and heading that you might as well just render the tank spotted or not. CMAK's vehicle-induced dust was slightly better I think because it was more of a low-res cloud than an arrow shaped wedge. This surely needs *some* attention from BFC.

Is it this one? Sorry.