handihoc

I'm playing this game more than anything else since early CMx1, and loving it. Yes, it was released too early. Yes, there are still some bugs. Yes, to an extent we've been play testers. But in BF's defence, it's already been said, they don't have the resources that more commercial games companies do to fully test out the product before release, and they were contractually obliged to publish by a certain date, regardless. I know from my days in the publishing world, that publisher's/distributor's schedules are very tight. You are pressed to deliver your product (in my case novels) by a specific date, and once that date is agreed it's very difficult to alter it without setting it back an unacceptably long time, even if you are not entirely happy with what you've got. I published books that I would ideally have liked to spend another couple of months working on, but the deadline said no. Following that, look how much work BF have already done - and are continuing to do - on Shock Force. Unlike a book, a computer game/simulation, CAN be further developed AFTER release, if the team behind it is dedicated enough to do it. These guys are, even though they're effectively not being paid for it, at least in the short term. In the long term, I see this game engine, eventually sleek and polished, delivering some really exciting products, be it add-ons to modern warfare, WWII, or something else. In the meantime, even though the idea of Syria initially didn't appeal, I'm having a great time discovering what both SF and modern warfare are all about, and simultaeously looking forward mightily to what's down the road. And yes, I will look very seriously at the Marines Moduel and any other expansion packs that may appear, and will almost certainly buy them. There's nothing else that I'm aware of that comes close.

Cpl Steiner: yes, that's the only answer I've found. If they've split without my order, then I used the Split command, and give orders to regroup. But I shouldn't have to do that if I didn't want them Split in the first place. And they don't necessarily obey, anyway. Generally, just selecting a new destination for the whole squad results in half of them moving to the destination, and the straggling team moving in sync, but keeping the same distance apart, or possibly not moving at all. thewood: I guess it probably is about pathfinding, but I've had it happen in several battles now, maybe four or five times in total. Enough to convince me there's a little bug in there somewhere. [ November 03, 2007, 03:43 PM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

I sometimes find when I give a squad movement orders, that two or three members lag behind and, when the front men reach their obj and stop, the others stop too and never move up to join their comrades. They haven't actually split,as per a Split Team order, ie there is still only one icon. But they never, or rarely, regroup, no matter what subsequent orders they are given.

Wow! And Ouch! All my vehicles destroyed within minutes (RT Elite). Realising I was a dead dude, I opted to just watch the remainder of the battle unfold. Fantastic to watch the Syrian infantry manouevring into position, highly mobile, with purpose and intention, using the terrain like pros, tanks on overwatch. Really impressive. I'll be going back in soon. Which CMBO battle is it a recreation of (long time since I played)? And why haven't you posted this in the Scenarios forum? Superb pics, btw. The missile shots particularly highlight graphical subtleties that are easily missed in-game. [ November 01, 2007, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

Yes, I can imagine situations, particularly in single play, where the AI could set up an ambush, forcing the attacker to slow and go into cautious defensive mode, hence delaying it's approach on objectives. After a skirmish or two, AI (if significantly outnumbered) could secretly withdraw some or all of its forces in the hope that the attacker would now advance so cautiously as to not achieve all victory conditions. Or something along those lines. Of course, this is just my imagination at work. From a programmer's or designer's pov I have no notion of how feasible this is. This is possibly one of those situations where frustration in battle for one player can actually add to the enjoyment of the game experience. I mean, it'd be damned annoying to finally reach your goal only to find no one there, but annoying in the sense that you would actually appreciate the enemy and in-game tactics used. From the defender's pov, of course, secretly withdrawing in order to both slow the attacker's advance and live to fight another day, makes perfect sense. [ November 01, 2007, 03:06 AM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

George, I posted a comment at CMMODS, but under my previous handle, philwil. Needless to say, it was highly favourable. I'm just itching for more now. Having said that, there are some really excellent and imaginative scenarios appearing from several designers. It really makes the game. My only complaint is that I don't have the damn time to play them all!

Mirabelle and Phullbrick, please continue to keep us posted on how it goes. My feeling, as I said earlier, is that the US will probably not survive against a human player (it's damn tough enough against the AI!), but it'll be very interesting to see how it really plays out for you two.

Great program. Thanks for posting that Cpl Steiner and Zwobot. Left me full of admiration for those young soldiers, and proud to be a Brit. Looks like the next episode is going to be a toughie though. Still on the melting away theme, I think that could be a nice addition to SF - the ability for the enemy to retreat off map, without the other side necessarily being aware.

Will watch it tomorrow. Sounds very interesting. But yes, agreeing with GSX, realworld combat situations like that one can't be wholly effectively modelled in a game or simulation like SF - imagine what this forum, plus reviews, would be like if a scenario required several hours of manouevring, retreating, re-positioning etc. I quite like the idea of the enemy melting away, though, as opposed to simply surrendering. I had that once in an online CC battle (in Case's Ladder, if anyone remembers) where my opponent late one evening, who was losing and not at all happy about it, went rather quiet. After about an hour of nothing really happening, and several unanswered requests from me to respond, I realised the bastard had simply gone off to bed without bothering to tell me.

Okay, the blue AI just beat me again, in a very well-coordinated attack. I suffered a tactical defeat. One thing that's already been mentioned, I've yet to see a Syrian BRDM2 ATGM let off a single missile, let alone kill anything. They seem to just sit there and die, even when they have a target in sight. Is this a bug? Oh, and what's 'Baking'?

I'm impressed by the Blue sides AI in this. It does actually mount a very aggressive, relatively methodical, and well-staged attack. Great map, too. My only reservation is the Syrian weaponry, particularly the vehicles provided. They just don't seem to have a chance against US weapons. Having said that, it may be that if I deploy them more carefully, in better ambush locations, I could get a result. Anyway, nice one Mark Ezra. As you say, an AI that can take it to you . . . BIG plus. I also like the AI multi-plans. It means I can't set up based simply on my knowledge of the previous attack. This looks like another 'under the hood' aspect of SF that maybe marks it out from its competitors. I look forward to seeing more scenarious that exploit this. I'm going back in now to see what happens second time round.

George, are you saying that, if I update to V.04, it will not make any difference to the single player battle?

Nice one, Phullbrick. Can't understand everything, but enough to follow the action. Good video too. My feeling is that, in multiplayer and/or PBEM, the US side will be completely toasted (assuming the Red player is not thoroughly incompetent). I reckon this scenario is set up as a single player game against the Syrian AI (or, more to the point, against that demonic Scot who designed it). Be interesting to see how it pans out for you guys, but I'll be very surprised if the US get anywhere near their goal. The enemy will be able to pick you off at leisure. I've just started again as US, Elite, against the AI. Trying a different tack, making better progress than before, but, obviously, I now have a major advantage in terms of advance intel. However it works out, this battle really brings out some of SF's strongest features. Great fun.

So far, the best I've been able to pull off is a draw, with heavy losses for the US (and that was after several attempts, so with the advantage of prior intelligence). It really is a tough one, and very enjoyable. The final stage is - literally - a real killer. Determined to go back and get a win at some point. This is a great example of how statistically weaker forces (Reds) can intelligently use terrain to their advantage and overcome a more powerful force. Alot of the US long-range firepower is negated here, even with the open terrain. Has anybody managed a win on this one, first time?

I prefer Elite - for realism and a more challenging battle.

I also don't see why a time limit is necessarily an artificial constraint. I've never served in the forces but surely there must be many realworld combat situations where time is short and critical e.g. at X.00 hours your divisional assets are due to be assigned elsewhere; if you haven't taken that village/town/crossroads etc by X.00 hrs the enemy will have brought up enough supplies/reinforcements to make them virtually impossible to dislodge; you must secure that objective by X.00 hrs to enable another friendly force to advance unhindered. I'm kind've speculating here, but it feels authentic enough to me.

I'm starting to think that the devil may hail from Scotland!

Problem is, with unlimited time, scenarious can become ridiculously easy for the US to win, with their vastly superior long range firepower. For me, having the time limit, forces me to play better and harder. The fact that it makes the scenario tougher to win is usually a major plus.

Just tried it again, and got pasted again! Ambushes everywhere! Really good design. It pushes me to think very carefully about every move. Great stuff!

Totally excellent, George. Just got my ass kicked good and hard by the AI. Always a good sign. Love the map, full of surprises. Going back again soon to show those bstards whose boss! I commented on your previous scenarios, which I enjoyed v much but found, in the end, a bit of a walkover for the Blues. This one ain't. It's really challenging - and with v1.04 the enemy is particularly effective! Love it. Keep 'em coming'!

Great little scenario! Got my ass whooped by the AI - always a good sign. Will go back and try again. Love it.

Much better, smoother performance than 1.03, but the actual framerate is still lower than it should be for a system like mine. eg Allah's Fist 18-25; Strength and Faith (a very graphics rich scenario): 8-20. This is with everything maxed. I would expect higher, given that people here with lower specs are getting better framerates. But the main point is, it's smooth and beautifully playable now, with only very occasional lag, which is much reduced from previously. So overall I'm very happy - SF plays like it should, with no delays. I'm just baffled that on such a high end system I'm getting such low framerates overall. As Steve says, it must be down to Nvidia - just hope they sort it soon. Core 2 Duo E660 2G Ram Nvidia 7950 GT Win XP Media Center. [ October 02, 2007, 03:16 AM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

Yep, very smooth gameplay and mouse movement, scrolling etc, even on biggest maps with multiple units. Looking v good.

I love pausable RT. I always found WEGO a bit of a pain in the butt - real sense of breaking the exquisite tension every minute, particularly in MP. Being able to pause when you want is great - but not sure how that works in MP with CMSF. I love this game. Even with all its flaws it's the best I've played in a long time. Thinking about possible future add-ons and expansions, once the basics are sorted, really gets me on one.