handihoc

As long as they don't spend too much time polishing them, does it really matter?

I thought it was fixed, but it ain't. Or maybe it applies only to scenarios made before V1.08? Anyway, playing Webwing's Ghost campaign, in two separate scenarios bomb craters caused during action phase show up at the beginning of the next replay (ie are visible before the bomb hits). [ May 06, 2008, 03:06 PM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

Yep, looks like another stunning campaign to look forward to. And with the Marines module in sight - God help me, how am I going to cope? And I'm nowhere near retirement age!!!

Excellent point, Thomm. Red v Red is becoming increasingly popular, and in many ways more interesting, given the technical superiority of the US. More Red v Red equipment and weaponry would be a definite plus.

1) . . . directionable smoke for inf in the new module or v1.09? It p's me off when I need smoke cover for my guys but they can only chuck their grenades in the direction they're facing. In WEGO it means waiting a full minute to change facing before throwing smoke, by which time several may be dead. I can't see why smoke can't be treated as a weapon and therefore able to fire in any direction. 2) A Delete Saved Game button? A minor but still niggling thing, having to go into MyComputer every time I want to delete old games. 3) Lavatories in Syrian trenches? They really get ripe very soon after the first US airbursts. I find myself hanging back at the edge of the battlefield, and my brave men are reluctant to advance (gasmasks seem ineffective). Sometimes I have to shut down and go for a long walk in the fresh air. Even cans of airspray for individual soldiers would help.

Thanks guys. Great stuff. Big fun coming. Really looking forward to testing out those monsters and all the other new stuff. Real life may just have to get out of my way for a while.

Those Marines vehicles are totally bizarre. Never seen anything like them. What are the ones depicted in those pics?

That IS a good one. Surprised it's not been picked up on earlier.

Will, welcome to the forum! Here, as you've discovered, you will meet civilian wargaming fans such as me with a keen interest in but not a fully comprehensive knowledge of matters of modern and contemporary warfare and military history/tactics/OOB's etc etc. Also, (as you have again already discovered!), you will meet genuine military dudes, either currently or recently serving, who REALLY know their stuff, have a vast amount of experience in their respective branches of their country's army, and are amply capable of putting you right about the tiniest military related detail. Several of them serve as advisors and testers on the game, which helps a lot in it's realism and authenticity. It's a rich mix here! But - as I hope you have also discovered - CMSF is a fantastic wargame/sim, with a great team behind it, some excellent player-designed scenarios and campaigns, and numerous more modules and add-ons to follow. So have fun, make the most of it and, as someone, maybe the Buddha (though I can't remember) said, Be careful what you ask for. You might just get it!

Ta very much.

That is awesome and terrifying. And yes, it would add so much to see some good damage modelling on vehicles in the game.

Yeah, I used to be an RT only man - but changed to mainly WEGO for that very reason that it's so handy, and entertaining, to be able to replay events and find out just what happened, often from a different perspective. It makes the battles much longer, but there's nothing wrong with that.

Or should it be Gunfight at the OK Olive Grove? This was great! (slight spoiler follows, but nothing ruinous). This afternoon I started playing The Bunker mission from Webwing's Ghost campaign. Moving my scouts forward I found their lives being made a misery by a Syrian sniper on a hill. I snuck my own sniper team cautiously forward until they had a visual, then fixed the camera on the enemy sniper to see how effective they'd be. Sure enough, after about 50 seconds, my team marksman downed him at about 700 metres. Very satisfying. At the end of the turn I checked my team, and found my marksman dead. Replayed the turn, this time watching my team, and - amazing - it seems the two snipers shot each other dead at virtually the same moment.

I have the same thing with trenches, but also with grass - up close it looks fine, but disappears after, I don't know, maybe fifty metres. Move the camera forward and it starts to reappear. But I think this is a feature, not a bug, designed to save processor power/help keep the framerate down by not having too much detail at any one time and, to a certain extent, simulate the real life lack of visual clarity one gets at distance. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong. FYI I got a Nvidia 7950GT, E6600 Core 2 Duo, 2Gig RAM and have in-game graphics settings on max. [ April 26, 2008, 11:16 AM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

Hmm, the ghost campaign for instance is impossible to play without area fire IMO.

That's really nice artwork.

I've certainly done that a few times, and suffered for it like you. One thing I've learned in SF is that the AI can be a very unforgiving opponent. Sometimes that means taking things very slowly - ie realistically. Sneaking scouts forward metre by metre, giving them time to scan the terrain. A good example of this is The Hideout mission in Webwing's Ghost campaign. In the opening stages my initial urge was to push my men forward, somehow assuming they'd survive and overcome. They didn't. I don't want to give too much away, but this is definitely a mission in which you progress by sneaking a very few 'specialist' units forward, while the main body waits. These units, allowed to do the jobs they're trained for, have a very significant impact on what happens next. It's slow, it's tense, it's subtle. There isn't a lot of action for quite a while, but when it comes its a treat. Great fun! Haven't completed it yet, so I could still come a cropper, but I'm delighted that I'm being made to think so carefully about my tactics and about the roles of the various units under my command, particularly against a computer opponent.

"To create a dynamic campaign, each mission must check if a particular condition has been met" That's a nice touch that I wasn't aware of, never having gone into the editor. I don't know how wide the parameters and options are but it certainly seems to potentially offer a lot of variety for an imaginative designer. One day, if I ever get enough free time, I hope to go in and have a good look around, see what I can do with it. Unfortunately, I don't see that coming soon.

Reloading is always a single-player thing. In multi-play the reload option is eliminated, for the obvious reason that the other player ain't gonna let you have another bash at him just because you're moaning and howling that you made a couple of daft mistakes (ie, ran into his brilliantly devised ambush). Shock Force campaigns are primarily single-player oriented (forgive me, designers, if I'm wrong), which is great because SF is an excellent single-player wargame. I'm pretty sure that were I to attempt these battles as they stand against a good human opponent, one of us would be disadvantaged. Certainly, that's the case in Task Force Narwick and In Search of a Ghost. Both are excellent, both provide major tactical challenges for the Blue attacker - but put a human in charge of the Red forces in either of them and the Blues wouldn't get past first base. I hate to keep harking back to the 'good ole days' of CC, but the multiplay aspect of those campaigns really shone (whereas, as single player games they left much to be desired). I had many, many happy hours, days, weeks, months, years and countless late nights, playing through those campaigns online against a longtime wargaming friend - something which we, sadly, haven't achieved with SF. It is the one aspect that is missing for me in an otherwise superlative wargame. Some of the ops in CMx1 also worked very well in multiplay, though they were obviously quite short. I'm thoroughly enjoying the campaigns in SF, as well as many of the single missions. The AI, in well-designed scenarios, makes a challenging opponent, and the 'what's next' aspect of a campaign or operation always keeps me playing. I try not to reload too often - preferring generally to win by wits and skill, and take the consequences if I'm wrong. So for me it's really pleasing that designers like Paper Tiger are building in more dynamic, branching aspects. Long may you continue - and perhaps the next challenge is to design campaigns that will stand the test of both single and online play, if such a combination is possible.

Also, I've had men leave a straight line trench when ordered to follow the line. It's worse when ordered to enter the trench from outside (some of them simply go prone or kneeling outside the trench), or when given different waypoints along the trench. It doesn't always happen that they leave or fail to enter the trench, but often enough to make me very nervous.

This is great, Huntarr, as is your other one on Pop 'n Drop (is that the right title). I hadn't realised how versatile the system is for these tactics. Thanks a lot.

That is good news indeed! A similar issue, which hopefully is also being worked on, is that inf debarking from a vehicle STILL sometimes go for a long runaround in the open rather than high-tailing it pdq into the building they've been ordered to.

I've seen that happen recently, too. Infantry given orders to go one way, but some or all taking another route where they already 'know' the enemy are waiting.

Great news! I'm looking forward to this one bigtime! Going to finish Webwings Ghost campaign first, but after that . . . .

Don't want to invalidate your point, but jeez, look at the detail on that frickin' tank!