Jump to content

istari

Members
  • Posts

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by istari

  1. Steve- thanks for the quick reply. Fortunately, one mission won't be that bad to replay (especially as I have a much better idea of the Syrian defensive deployment :>). I can't say enough how much I appreciate the continued work you and the team put it into the CM series. You'll have a Day 1 buyer here for any module coming up. Looking forward to CM British Forces and CM Normandy. Chris
  2. Really looking forward to downloading 1.11 tonight and getting back into CMSF after several week's absence. That patch list is simply amazing! I'm particularly gratified that one of the features I (and many others :>) were arguing for was included - the ability to turn off floating icons completely. I'd held off playing "Guarding the Far Flank" in the hopes that feature would come along, and reading another poster's experiencing playing without floating icons and having it "like a movie" is exactly what I'm anticipating. OK, here's my question: I'd completed the first mission of the Marines campaign, and stopped playing at the setup round of the second mission. That was a few weeks ago. I understand there's an updated Marines campaign in the 1.11 patch. Do I have to restart the Marines campaign, or can I pick up where I left off? Also, do we know (in general) what's changed in the updated Marines campaign? Thanks! Chris
  3. If you want a simple keycommand to switch off everything, why not also have the cinematic view. All cinematic view involves is the program automatically toggling that CTRL-U (or whatever it is) before and after each playback. Heck, even I could write a script of that complexity! Chris
  4. Thanks Smaragdadler. I'm not on a crusade here, but nice to know I'm not completely crazy. :>
  5. Remember too that there will be differences in Condition, Experience, Leadership skill etc. As with CMBB, veteran German troops may be Weakened Veterans with superb +2 NCOs, while Americans are Fit Green troops with +0 NCOs. That will make a real difference.
  6. Wow, no one else thinks this would be good idea? Seriously? It seems like a relatively simple enhancement as an option. C'mon, someone else out there must enjoy a "clean playback" as much as I do! :> Chris
  7. Amen to C3K's post. Now that the game is truly drawing folks in with 1.10, I hope and expect the # of scenarios will start climbing. Better interface would be a big plus.
  8. Having spent significant time with 1.10 over the past week, want to again compliment the Battlefront folks. 1.10 continues to be a terrific experience, with my best moments comparing with the best from CMx1. So here's my request to make the experience even better: I love playing WEGO for the cinematic experience (and tension) of watching playback and being able to rewind and watch key moments. While the floating icons, colored bases and other visual aids are good for planning, I'd love to have a "Cinematic View" option, where they would all disappear during playback. I usually end up toggling them off before playback, but it gets old doing this every turn. This would be a simple Y/N checkbox in the Game Options screen. It would apply only to WEGO playback, and would remove all artificial overlays/icons during playback. What do others think? Would this be a welcomed option? Chris
  9. Just starting the battle "Guarding the Flanks", and I'm impressed at the darkness of the night. The visual effects of tracers and blasts are terrific. However, it's also very hard to see anything during the planning phase! Is there a mod or a planned future feature that would enable us to see the landscape through NVG or some other assist? After all, that's what the US commanders would be seeing as they positioned their forces :> It should be a toggleable option so we can still view the great night effects during the playback. Thoughts? Chris
  10. Completely agree! Please keep the severely wounded/dead on the list.
  11. I posted a few days ago about the T-90 vs M1A1 FEP (look for the post on page 2 or 3). I was actually asking because I had the opposite experience - I was surprised at how effective the T-90s were in a head-to-head engagement during "USMC Bad Moon Rising". My initial try, I attempted to duplicate the tactics used in Operation Desert Storm by keeping my tanks moving steadily forwards at a steady pace (Move, not Hunt) in line abreast, thinking that I'd have superior fire on the move and superior sensors to pick up the T-90s first. That was a bad idea. Despite having all my Abrams pointed in the right directin, the T-90s still sighted me first and opened fire. In the end, I'd lost all 14 Abrams and took down 8-9 T-90s. Yes, most of my crews survived, but I still lost the tank force. So in my experience, in a head-to-head fight at medium range (1000-2000m), the T-90 came out very well indeed. Chris
  12. Totally agree with Steiner's point, I was thinking the same thing myself. That part of the challenge (and drama!) in WEGO is placing your bets each turn and then biting your lip in the hopes that the plan comes together during that 60 seconds. Much more drama (for me) than RT, but as Steve said, "to each their own", and no reason to force one or the other. For RT, I'm particularly intrigued by the suggestion of adding command delays for RT troops. That's a great idea. If I could have RT with TiVo style replay and command delays, that would really offer the best of both worlds. Yeah yeah, I know how easy is it is to ASK for features, and how hard it can be to actually CODE them :>, but here's a vote for TiVO+Command Delays for future RT releases. Chris P.S. Of course, Command Delays should be optional, so that existing players who like quick response in RT aren't being asked to sacrifice anything to us WEGO types :>.
  13. Unfortunately, I don't have any answers for you Gryphon, but I am going to add a question to your list... You make a good point about WWII troops not moving with SWAT-style animations of modern infantry. That got me thinking about how impressed I am with the infantry AI in 1.10. They really move and react like highly trained professionals. I was particularly impressed last night to watch a Marine team assaulting up in bounding overwatch, time their grenade toss perfectly into a trench, leap down and pause to finish off a few cowering defenders, then charge through keeping appropriate spacing and weapons boresited. So here's my question... Will we actually see a less competent infantry AI for WWII Normandy? Yes there were US Airborne, 1st Division veterans from North Africa, German Fallschirmjaeger, etc, so the elites should be highly skilled professionals as good or better than modern US troops. Yet these elite were a small minority of the WWII battlefield. Bolger made the point a few years ago that even your vanilla line battalion in the modern US Army would be considered elite in WWII terms. In other words, green citizen draftees or German conscripts in CMx2 Normandy shouldn't move with the precision and training of modern US Marines, right? Chris
  14. Steve - Appreciate the honesty of you just coming out and say, "no, we don't do that right now." I run a medical software company and we try to take the same approach of blunt honesty with customers, but I understand the temptation to avoid saying "no" and upsetting folks. :> So if I'm understanding correctly, AI plans can be set for either offensive or defensive scenarios. It just requires that the scenario designer anticipate where the player will be attacking (as in the T-62 platoon in your example above). That's a relief, as I was concerned that all attacking missions would be against a static foe, and only when the AI was attacking would plans come into play. Now at least I'll need to keep an eye out for counterattacks, flanking moves etc as long as the scenario designer hard-coded them. Agree that nirvana will be AI plans + triggers. Falling back after X% casualties, counterattacking with reserves when Point Y is taken, etc... I'm drooling already. I know you won't be giving any details yet about CMx2 Normandy, but here's one vote to place this feature high in the priority list. The Germans in particular need the ability to execute triggers in defending the bocage. Chris
  15. Mark - Thanks for the detailed reply. Great to hear from the scenario designer himself! :> Props to you for an excellent scenario. Along with "Al Hawl", it's the best I've played among the dozen or more I've tried so far. *** SPOILERS **** I ultimately attacked across the fields to the L, overran the trench on that side and broke into the main compound from there. Now that the scenario's over and I can see all the technicals and RPG waiting for me I had come up the main road... nice defensive plan! So you intended the scenario to be a die in place mission, ala Fallujah in 2004? Bleed the Marines white and claim victory? That makes sense. I'm curious about the reinforcements that arrived - I saw some technicals along the road to the N, but they seemed to just kind of mill around aimlessly once they'd appeared. Does the new CMSF AI allow you as a designer to thrust them towards an objective or otherwise direct their actions once they arrive? I ask because I saw similar behavior in Allah's Fist, where the reinforcing AI just seemed to sit in the deployment zones and get picked apart. Final question for you... I agree that with the addition of triggers, the AI could become a real monster. That's a good thing, and I can't wait! However, in the current version of CMSF, is there any way for a defender to respond dynamically to an attacker? Or will all my future missions in the current CMSF/CMSF Marines end up being static defenders being dismantled piece-by-piece? It makes sense given this particular scenario, but I'm concerned if that's the general experience of all attack scenarios in the future. Thanks Chris
  16. Aha, very cool! I hadn't realized you could do sighting from a future waypoint. That will help tremendously in finding hull-down positions during the engagement, not just during setup. Thanks much. Now we just need BFC to add movable waypoints ala CMx1, so that when I determine my first attempt at placing a waypoint isn't quite right, I can adjust right there. :> Chris
  17. Hi guys - Thanks for the tips. I did check out the Global Security site, and it's a good start. I recognize this as the old FAS.org site, and a lot of the information is getting pretty dated. Many entries describe "planned for introduction in 2003..." etc, so I wonder if there are other resources that are even more up-to-date. I imagine alot has changed in response to lessons learned since 2003 in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Chris
  18. Question about Defensive AI in CMx2: Is there capability for broader AI plans when defending? I ask because I just completed "USMC Bad Day for Allah", where you're tasked with assaulting a town held by a Moktada Al-Sadry style militia and take the Madrassa. Great scenario and tense nail-biting gameplay until I finally broke into the main town and occupied the Madrassa. The rest of the AI didn't react at all. They still stayed in their original locations scattered around the city and I had to hunt them down one-by-one. That was a big surprise and broke the immersion for me - if the Madrassa is the religious center, the symbolic heart of the town, for the AI to not react at all and just sit there to be ground down piecemeal... very dismaying. I was proud of my break in from an unexpected angle and thought I'd caught them by surprise before they could reposition to plug the gap, but now I'm thinking that I don't have to worry about counterattacks in CMx2. I realized that the scenario appears to be just going in and dismantling a static defense piece-by-piece. No surprise counterattacks, no sudden shift of forces. That's a big shift from CMx1, where I was overwhelmed more than once by the AI rushing back to defend the flags. Yes it was predictable, but it was still difficult to counteract sometimes when you'd been bled dry trying to GET to the flags in the first place :>. Is this just a quirk of this scenario, or is it true that there aren't really any AI plans beyond the local TacAI of each individual unit when AI is defending? Thanks! Chris
  19. Thanks for the replies so far. I've only been fighting against the T-90, and they seem quite capable. Agree that they're vulnerable to catastrophic hits, and as far as sighting perhaps the T-90s were still when my Abrams were moving. That surprises me because once my Abrams sighted them (after they fired) they were also rolling forwards. I'd been counting on my Abrams to sight them first in a meeting engagement where both are moving, but no such luck. Also agree that given that both are using 2nd generation FLIR, they should either both see through the smoke (standard) or both be blocked (thermal obscurant). I'm also curious about the statement that the T-90s are inferior in shooting at range. My Abrams were rolling forwards, and the T-90s were rolling towards me. Both were firing on the move and scoring equally, but I probably need to do a number of repeats to verify this. Finally - I had my Abrams tank commanders unbuttoned going into the fight. I'm realizing that at night, that might do much good. Perhaps sighting is improved when the TC is buttoned up during night operations? Chris
  20. Steve - As a longtime Combat Mission player who's just immersing into CMSF, I'm thrilled to hear that you're planning on adding Replay to RT mode. At first, I couldn't stand RT, but as I'm playing more and more, I can see the benefits in certain situations. However, for me the biggest draw of CM was the drama of the action, being able to jump right down to an individual soldiers view as that Tiger appeared around a corner or a Nebelwerfer barrage came whistling down. So even though I can see where RT has possibilities, I'm sticking with WEGO for the Replay ability. If RT can add Replay, then I think we'll have the best of both worlds! As for the specific feature, I'd suggest that you do it like TiVo, where the DVR is maintaining a running buffer of several minutes, but the viewer can "rewind" in 15 sec increments. Now several minutes may be too much data in the new CMx2 engine, but the key point is to be able to go back several "clicks" in small increments - maybe it's 5 second clicks x 6 or 10 sec clicks x 3, etc. But sometimes I just want to go back 5-10 seconds, other times I'd want 30 sec. My 0.02, Chris
  21. OK - one last question and I'll stop spamming the boards. It's really fun to be "getting back into the Combat Mission groove" and asking questions about the underlying warfare concepts rather than discussing game bugs. I was an avid player of Steel Panthers II and became quite familiar with the range of modern land weaponry circa 1999-2000. However, I've been off playing Combat Mission in World War II for the past seven years and there haven't been any other modern wargames of note. Yes there were games like Full Spectrum Warrior, but none I can think of that required an intimate knowledge of the modern US armed forces post 9/11. Now I'm discovering that a lot has changed in the US armed forces since Steel Panthers II! What is this M32 AGL thingie? How does FBCB2 work? What's the real difference between the M1A1SA, M1A1 FEP, M1A2SA and the M1A2SEP??? Can anyone recommend good resources for bringing myself up to speed with the latest gear & tactical organizations of the US Army and USMC circa 2008? Many thanks!! Chris
  22. I'm experimenting with the Yakima Training Campaign's 2nd scenario to practice calling ARTY and CAS. My confusion is that I don't know what my own flights are carrying! For example, I called in the A-10 for an area target to plaster the three T-54s. Unfortunately, I don't know if he was only carrying Mavericks or also carrying cluster bombs. If I knew what he was carrying, then I'd call for fires differently. Similar for the Apache - is it carrying Hydra-70 + Hellfires or an all Hellfire loadout? I'd know how to use it better if I knew what weapons were available. I know this must sound anal-retentive (;>), but it's a big difference in planning to know if I can nail that concentration of tanks in a single pass with cluster bombs, or whether I'm going to be depending on the A-10 to make pass after pass over a span of multiple turns to pick them off one-by-one. Etc. Thanks! Chris
  23. Yes, I used the Search function and found a thread from 12/2007 where folks were complaining this was much harder in CMx2 than CMx1. Here it is 10/08 and we have the superb new 1.10 patch. Are there any new tricks available for finding hull-down position? I'm about to start TF Thunder and I see the berms into Syria. Would love to sneak an Abrams up there to scan the environment with my advanced 2nd gen TIS before committing the rest of the force, but I don't want to expose the belly to any waiting ATGMs. Advice? Or is this something that is awaiting future CMx2 releases? Thanks! Chris
  24. Having just played USMC Bad Moon Rising, I'm curious about the relative strengths of the T-90SA vs the Marines' M1A1 FEP. (For context, I used to be totally familiar with the M1 variants, but I've been out of the modern wargaming space since Steel Panthers II, and now there are all these new models I've never encountered before! :>) Based on the manual and some additional Googling, here's my understanding of the M1A1 FEP: * It's the M1A1HC with... * M1A2's GEN II TIS * GPS + other electronics to offer detailed coordinates from LRF out to 8000m. Presumably important for calling for fires, etc. * Eyesafe LRF It DOES not have the following from the M1A2/M1A2 SEP: * CITV - so TC is dependent on gunner's sight for long-range imaging * FCBC2 - so no digital battlefield awareness * 3rd generation DU armor Is this basically correct? If so, it sounds like the M1A1 FEP is almost an exact match for the T-90SA. They both have advanced thermal imaging but no hunter-killer for TC. Neither has battlefield "internet" for enhanced SA. M1A1 FEP has superior survivability for crew, T-90SA has Shtora active defense. Basically, as a commander it seems that I should treat the T-90SA as equivalent to the M1A1 FEP, while the M1A2 SEP is a cut above (CITV, FCBC2, 3rd gen DU armor) Agree? Chris P.S. Is the ESSA thermal imaging sight on the T-90SA equivalent to the 2nd generation TIS on the M1A1 FEP? I ask because in USMC Bad Moon Rising, I was surprised to find that the T-90s apparently sighted me first and opened fire. I was counting on the new 2nd gen TIS to give me first sight advantage.
  25. Actually, Grumbling Grognard's post wasn't that long, so I can respond quickly. My experience to date has been slightly different than his. Clearly there are AI problems. The vast majority of the Syrian armored force in Al Hawl just sat there or diffidently creeped forward without any real urgency. So that critique is fair. However, I did run into Syrian infantry within the town that were pushing ahead, so at least some of the troops were advancing. The AI wasn't entirely brain-dead. Just a few more off the top of my head... In USMC Bad Moon Rising, the T-90s are clearly moving forwards across the terrain and engaging my M1s. In Allah's Fist, the AI does seem to just appear and then sit there in the reinforcement zones. This is definitely disappointing, as they could have really mauled me had they aggressively moved to my flanks. In Ambush Tutorial, the Syrian uncon troops are clearly pushing ahead with urgency and drive, forcing a really tough battle. Etc etc. Overall, the AI seems pretty passive in most of the battles I've fought. Not totally brain-dead, but not putting me under much pressure. This is disappointing and I hope that future scenarios I try will have better AI "plans". Some of my best memories in Steel Beasts were conducting desperate defenses under terrific Red pressure, and I'd love to duplicate that in CMSF. I wouldn't go so far as to call it broken, and I'm still having alot of fun (the ultimate test! :>), but I can see where the game might peter out much sooner for me if the AI isn't posing a challenge. Yes, I can play RT against other humans, but my gaming schedule is pretty erratic and I really enjoy the pace of SP WEGO, so I'm hopeful that the AI will improve as scenario designers become more proficient with CMx2 and as the series itself evolves towards Normandy, Bagration et al. My 0.02, Chris
×
×
  • Create New...