handihoc

Guys (and girls), just to add my four cents worth. I've taught advanced English part-time to adult foreign students and business execs from all over the world for several years. People from South America, Russia, China, Japan, all over Europe, the works. And you know, the ones that have almost the hardest time getting to grips with the language are US Americans. Honestly. They're pretty damn hopeless. Almost beyond help. But even worse - the worst by far- are Australians. They really don't get it at all.

Just played the latest version. Really tough. Needed all the forces at my command, and the reds play like they're committed to keeping this village at any cost. I did get a total victory, but only on the third attempt. The red counterattack works well now. One query, which appears to be a bug not a design fault: I've yet to see a Toyota open fire on anything. Has anyone seen them actually shoot at the blues? Great inf battle. Love it. And I think now it will work well in mp.

Win XP 32-bit SP2 Media Center edition, (build 2600) Core2Duo E6600 @ 2.4 Ghz ASUS® P5LD2 SE/C: DUAL DDR2, S-ATA, x16 VGA, 3 PCI/3 PCI-E MB 2 Gig CORSAIR DDR2 667MHz RAM Nvidia 7950GT (512MB Vram)FW 93.71 CMO CMC 19AW [Primary Monitor] (19.1"vis, November 2006) Philips 190S5 [secondary Monitor] (19.1"vis, s/n VN 078910, May 2005) OPTIONS: Vert sync ON 3D Model Quality: Best 3D Texture Quality: Best Anti Alias: On High Priority: OFF Everything pretty fine on smaller battles, but more and more mouse lag and jerky camera moves the bigger the battle gets.

Oops, missed that in your original post.

Still love the battle overall, but like Ala11kal, I didn't need (or use this time) the Apache, and could almost have won without the reinforcements. !!!SPOILER!!! Also, still not much of a red counterattack. Most of the inf stayed hunkered down in the woods, and the three Toyotas stayed together way outside the village, never let off a shot, and eventually got taken out by my mg teams.

Someone - I think it's KiloAlpha - has said in another thread that he's working on a 31 battle campaign. I imagine it'll be a while before its ready, but I'm sure looking forward to it.

Ironpants, I just want to say, even though I've not yet played it, No, there are almost certainly not too many enemy units! I say this because, in some otherwise great scenarios, there's little single player replayability because the red side is relatively easily overcome. US needs a tough opponent because US firepower is so powerful. For me it's always a good sign if I take a bashing, because it means I've got to think again and come back with different tactics. I'm lookign forward to testing this one, but, as it's obviously a big one, have to wait for patch 1.03 in the hope that the mouse lag thing will be sorted. It shouldn't be an issue as I have a powerful pc, but sadly, for the moment, it is, and I'm limited to the smaller and medium sized battles - some of which are really great. But the main message (at the risk of repeating myself) is PLEASE make it hard for the US. SF really has so much to offer and its extraordinary to watch a battle unfold in such detail but for me there is quite often a sense of anti-climax at the end of a tense battle, to find I have a Total Victory with so many of my troops left intact and an enemy wiped out.

Haven't tried your mission yet, Gdog, but it's on my list. KiloAlpha - really looking forward to your campaign. Good campaigns are what really work for me and keep me coming back again and again in a good wargame. My only request, remember the US has overwhelming advantages overall, particularly in single player mode. So do give the reds a helping hand. And (ok, that's two requests), if possible make it playable both ways - great for multiplayer. Rock on!

Great battle, (newest version) but, as before, on the whole I reckon the US needs to be given more exacting penalties and/or the Reds toughened up somehow. I scored a Total Victory/Enemy surrender with eight minutes to spare, 4 dead, 14 wounded, one vehicle lost, not a single Red left alive. It's the old problem of 'how do you make the enemy AI act like it's life depends on it?', and though it puts up a fairly decent fight it's still weak against an experienced human player. Looking forward to getting some MP play in on these scenarios. That'll be the real test. But overall a tense and very enjoyable battle.

Great scenario, full of intensity and challenge. Nice touch where two of my strykers, with squads, got wiped out by my own Apache marauding half blind and slightly off target! I think the enemy forces could've been stronger to make it a real challenge. Had I not lost so many men to friendly fire I'm pretty sure I'd have had a total victory. (version 1.01b)

How do you blast? I give a squad the order to move to a wall and blast it, and they move but then do nothing else. Tried it several times, never a single blast (and yes, they are carrying demo charges). I know the manual says it can take a squad several minutes - but what's the max? I've waited more than five minutes on a couple of occasions, and with the clock counting down on a 40 minute mission, that can be very valuable time lost.

Really nice, very fierce battle. Great map too. I love the streetfighting. Great to have infantry only battles turning up here, as they make a nice variation on some of the larger heavy metal scenarios. My only criticism here, as with other battles, is that in the end I won a total victory with pretty minor losses, at elite level. So beefing up the Syrian's defensive capabilities could make it more balanced for single play.

Really impressed by this one. I got a mere draw as US at elite level. Got the hq and cache, but failed to find Shakim. Love the fact that it's inf only. Allows you to really get down in the dirt and room to room with your troops. Discovered something new: wounded get tended by follow up teams in the same location. Nice touch, BF! And the hunt for Shakim added a really nice RP/thriller element to a great scenario and a genuinely innovative wargame. (No real evidence of the Red side trying to enter the compound though). Fantastic to see so many truly imaginative approaches by player-designers in the community. Effing Ace!

Another strange thing - CAUTION: SPOILER ALERT!! - was that down the road, near the roadside stall, a massive IED exploded when none of my units were anywhere near it. Later I found a bunch of Syrian corpses scattered around the crater, so looks like they were trying to cross the road and set it off accidentally due to proximity. An example of not very intelligent AI, I guess. Or is there another explanation?

Nice one. Tried it as US elite, got wiped out first time. Second time suffered a tactical defeat with major losses. Lovely map, tough mission and satisfyingly aggressive enemy AI. Strange bug, though. My scout mmg team, ordered to move into an empty building, spent the entire mission exhausting themselves by leaping backwards and forwards over the same stone wall! Couldn't do anything to stop 'em. Hope to see more missions from you.

This one's tough (Black Bear Down). Just got a pasting. Love it. Thanks Louch. This is a great example of a designer experimenting to see how much the game can encompass, and coming up with something really tense, atmospheric and challenging that's also significantly different from most of the other (also often excellent) battles I've played so far. It makes the future possibilites for CMSF look really exciting.

Oops, yes, I meant here, not her. Don't know what came over me!

Mishga, are you a GIRL?? Wow, things could be looking up round here! In answer to the thread question: YES, very much. It's flawed and not-quite-finished, but still brilliant, and I do believe in Battlefront and their commitment to their products and customers, so can't wait for upcoming patches and add-ons. (Just wish the mouse lag would get sorted quickly, though. It stops me playing the bigger battles). [ August 18, 2007, 07:07 AM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

Yes, British Paras were cool, but I actually rather enjoyed the Japanese too. Strange thing was, when reinforcements arrived for either side, the budget being what it was, they often consisted of a handful of strange slightly dark-reddish toned plastic chaps with colourful feathers in their hair and armed with bows, arrows and tomahawks. Didn't seem to matter. Ah, but who would have thought there were so many people out there whose lives were changed forever by imaginative use of rockeries! I'm getting quite a rush of nostalgia and adrenalin just looking at yours, Melnibone (rockery, that is).

Old folks rockeries rock!!

Anybody had any probs with Hamachi? I ask because this looks like a dream, given that since getting a routered home network I've been unable to play mp games at all. Tried Port Forwarding and my internet connection died. Took hours of stress and multi-tech support to get back online. So I'm kinda worried Hamachi might do something similar. Love the idea of CMSF network, Gdog, but I need reassurance. What's the verdict?

Yeah, though I'm not a military man, I'm a veteran wargamer. Been playing in one form or another since toy soldiers on my Mum's rockery! Computer gaming obviously revolutionised gaming, and there've been some tremendous games over the years. But you're right, AI will never match an experience human opponent - at least, not in the near future. My prob lately is router related, meaning I can't configure to play MP any more. Damn frustrating. So I dream of the impossible - an AI that has the potential to really outwit and outmanouevre me. CMSF is my first foray into modern warfare, and I love it, but now I'm becoming used to the system and unfamiliar weaponry and tactics I'm hungry for more and more challenging battles. Keep 'em coming, though. These games thrive on scenario designers and developers who are willing and able to put in the time to exploit the system to the max.

Hate to spoil the party but I'm afraid I'm gonna have to disagree slightly on the overall opinion here, though in the spirit of constructive criticism. The problem I found with both these scenarios, but particularly Brandenburg, is that for the US side they are too damn easy, even at Elite level. I'm finding this with a lot of battles Great maps, George, and Wilcox was quite challenging, but I still won on my first attempt with relatively minor losses. Brandenburg I virtually walked. Lost one Abrams and a squad, plus a few individual grunts, but completed it in 45 minutes for a decisive victory, and not a single Syrian survived. (Almost all the Red positions were revealed from the start, so point artillery was able to pick a lot of them off pretty smartish. I then advanced cautiously, expecting a lot more trouble, but didn't really find it.). Love the maps, both of them, but in both scenarios I feel the Red side needs to be seriously beefed up. An overall prob with the SF game system is that the US has such overwhelming firepower and communicative ability, and the enemy AI is not that bright. I accept that, from a realism PoV, given contemporary military doctrine and socio-political imperatives, we fight (as the US) with preservation of friendly lives as a priority - it's not WW2, where all out destruction can be deemed acceptable - and this seems to be built into the game system. I generally (though not always) expect to win as US, but fight knowing that even minor losses of my men is a gigantic setback. That's ok, but it does create problems from a player PoV if you are playing against a not hugely intelligent AI (and I'm not sure that CMx2 AI is any better, or even as good as, CMx1). So I don't want to be negative, I very much appreciate the fact that people like you are going to the trouble to provide scenarios to entertain people like me, but I would say to all scenario designers, think seriously about giving the Red teams more advantages (or reducing US firepower), because within the overall game setup the Reds are very disadvantaged, even defensively, against what the Strykers have to throw against them. I like what SF has to offer a lot, but balance of power is something that needs to be thought about very carefully to keep player interest.

Another one: the ability to choose the direction to pop smoke, for both inf and vehicles. Atm it seems to be automated in the direction of facing, which isn't always the optimum placing.

Finally gained a US Tactical Victory at Elite level, after several failed attempts. What a great battle! Tough and very well designed, it really highlights the strengths of CMSF. I'm still hyper! I think the balance is just about right. 30 minutes would definitely be too short for me. 45's about perfect. At 45 I managed to secure four of the victory locations, but with hardly any Syrians left alive I'm satisfied it was a solid win. Congrats Kieme. That's one of the best scenarios I've played.