c3k

You keyboard jockeys need to learn a thing or two about REAL warfare. Yeah, I was part of the REAL invasion of Syria, so sit back and listen to me tell you about what it was actually like. We were all vets of Iraq and Afghanistan. Some had been in more than that. The Euro's and Canucks? Hmmm, I don't know about them. Some peacekeeping I guess. Anyway, I saw a lot more men get hit in Syria than I ever saw in Iraq or the Stan. I think I know why. See, during one engagement, we were getting hit pretty hard. All our guys were vets. We knew what we'd done before and it had worked. If we couldn't just light 'em up, we'd dig down. You know, stack up some cover, work back into concealment. Anything other than take a knee on the parade ground. But I saw some good men in Syria do just that. Just take a knee in the open. Go figure. A lot of them got hit. Anyway, ordinarily, we'd do our job, but, brother, if we needed to we'd back off and let the Air Farce come in and pound them instead. Why die? Somehow, in the midst of this Sryian-fest, the Air Farce just isn't doing what it had done before. Another thing, and this is going to sound weird, but I've been there, so listen up. Sometimes I've felt like I was racing against the clock every time I was in battle. It's like there was someone screaming at me, "Hurry! Hurry! For Christ's sake, you're running out of time!" Weird, huh? Anyway, that made me do things I would never have done before. I took a lot more risks that way. And this will really make you think I'm nuts. Before, if I had a good position, I'd stay there. Maybe scooch a little deeper, move some dirt up, you know? Not in Syria. I don't know why. And in Syria, every time I wanted to stop, I had like a cumpulsion to move forward. It was like I was being pulled along on a colored line. Going places I'd NEVER have gone. I KNEW my men and I were being pushed into death traps, fire sacks, but we had no choice. It was like we were mesmerized and just HAD to go there. Weird. Toss me beer. I've got to get back to the war. I know I have a choice about going back, but it's like I don't belong anywhere else...

Hmmm, I consider that I _have_ been paying for additional features. See, I got a cool game about 1944 West Front Combat. The graphics were pretty good, but the underlying engine was EXTREMELY good. Later, I paid for an expansion to the East Front. Next, I wanted a tweak to the coding and a few more goodies, so I paid BF.C to develop that. After a long wait, I paid for even MORE features: 1 to 1 modeling in modern warfare. Then, for more features, I paid more. Marines? Yep. Brits? Yep, paid there. NATO? Sure, take my money, please. I consider that I have been paying for additional features (happily) for many years. To answer the OP question: Yes, I would pay for additionaly features. Ken

These look great. Thank you for doing this and sharing it with us. Ken

Agreed, triggers would be a boon to playing vs. the AI. In my imaginary world, the designer could set triggers by using a TARGET ARC command which would open up the subset of orders. Obviously, BF.C has been considering these types of additions and weighing the cost/benefit to implement them. When the benefit exceeds the cost to a degree greater than the benefit:cost ratio of ALL THE OTHER THINGS they're considering and doing, then they'll start working on it. In the meantime, I like hearing the varied suggestions being created and only hope that BF.C is keeping track of all these ideas, in case this type of coding can be implemented. Ken

Is the difficulty of hitting a moving target modelled? One moving towards/away from the firer is FAR easier to hit than one moving crosswise. (Relying on BF.C's record would strongly imply that this is the case, however I'm curious if there's any empirical evidence to back up this "feeling".) Snipers are, to my _opinion_, far too inaccurate. Another issue is the frequency with which their security team opens fire. (Yes, I've crafted a thread on that...Here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=89900 ) silverstars hits on one of the frustrations. Perhaps the sniper had the wrong zoom setting on his scope? Joking aside, there are so many variables, posting some more detailed information regarding this anecdote could help. Again, I support the notion that snipers are not as accurate in the game as they should be. On the flip side, why does it seem that SVD equipped enemy sharpshooters always nail my guys? Ken

My memory may be faulty, but I believe there was a discussion that for short moves some weapons do NOT need to be dismantled. Don't ask me how short it needs to be, but I _think_ that may account for what you're seeing regarding instantaneous moves by setup weapons. Ken

Yeah, you've just learned a valuable tactical lesson. TARGET at an area uses grenades (if close enough). If one unit TARGETs a building, and another unit enters it, the overwatch unit's grenades can cause friendly casualties, so be careful doing that. Using what Lanzfeld said, a QUICK to just outside the door, PAUSE for 15 seconds (or so), TARGET the building; the next order should be QUICK into the building with a TARGET ARC set to 360 degrees, encompassing at least the entire interior. (The TARGET ARC is necessary to override the previous target command, TARGET. No other command is sufficient.) Watch the grenades rain down... Ken

Actually, hitting man-size silhouettes at 300 meters using iron sights isn't that hard. I'm talking unknown range, open ground, not firing range. If you miss, which you shouldn't with a properly adjusted sight, you correct based on the dirt puff. Now, toss in the fact that they are moving, and trying to kill you, and firing back at you, and you've got about a gallon of adrenalin in your bloodstream, and you cannot just sit there and sight and fire, and you don't know which of the 200 puffs of dirt over, under, left, and right of your enemy may be yours, and you're hearing guys yelling about "the flank!!!" and things are going "BOOM!"... well, you get the picture. Target shooting and combat shooting (for real, not weekend make-believe) are different. If you're not sure, check the minimum marksmanship requirements for our soldiers/marines, then check the number of rounds expended so far. Subtract out whatever you'd like as "suppression fire". I think the number of "aimed at an enemy in my sights" rounds are far, far greater than the number of enemy casualties. That does not necessarily mean I think snipers haven't been nerfed. (Too many negatives? Okay: I think snipers in CMSF are nerfed.) Fun game. Ken

PM sent... Aaaarrrrrggggghhhh!!! No savegame. Crap. Time to see if I can recreate the occurrance. Sorry for the false hopes... Ken

C'mon, how about he tossed it up there? With the rocket tube sticking out the back, it'd be easy to throw, kind of like how a stick grenade goes further than a standard grenade. (Hey, are the different grenade throwing ranges modeled?) Or, it's abstracted, just like Casevac; it's in the game, you just don't see every single event. Ken

No beautiful artwork, but, playing CM:A I just had a BTR-60 reverse through an undamaged building. It went through the building, a one-story unit, and continued backing through the interior into an adjacent building location. The locations were part of the same building; no interior wall. Savegame availble... Yeah, I know; CM:A, not CM:Nato. Ken

Dietrich, Thank you!! Indeed, that was the thread I was hunting for. Thanks, Ken

I'll give it a go... Send me a private message or a link to a download site. Ken P.S. I'd imagine it uses Syrian forces in a security role at a Sryian embassy in a country other than Syria. For whatever reason, this embassy is going to be assaulted...

One player for each man in game!! Anything less is pure capitulation!! C'mon BF.C, eye on the ball, eye on the ball... Ken

Screens can't be captured: they can only be KIA'd or wounded. At least, until CM:Normandy.

Zap it my way: I'll give it a go later in the week (Thursday-Saturday). Ken P.S. Post a link/download or your email in my private messages in this forum. Ken

Okay, SOMEONE has to have links to images depicting Soviet/Russian defense doctrine. Theoretically, how would a Mechanized Rifle Battalion set up an all-round strongpoint? How about a Mechanized Rifle Regiment? Thanks for any links! Somewhat related, it's been awhile, but someone posted some fortification screenshots here. He'd made them with the editor to depict Soviet/Russian dug-in emplacements. A link or two to that would also be appreciated. (Sorry I forgot who did that, but the work obviously struck a chord!) Thanks, Ken

How about using a graphic, similar to artillery's Linear attack? Select "Air Support/Point Target" and click the target. That fixes one end of a blue line, representing the end of the attack run. The second click "sticks" the back end of the line down, delineating the orientation of the attack run. The second point should not need a valid LOS from the observer, since this is just simulating a spoken direction. This would keep the UI within familiar parameters, and, hopefully, keep the programming from getting too wonky. Ken

Sergei, Did you SEND the newly saved filename to a pbem recipient? There may be a "handshake" between the two datasets existing on player A's and player B's computer which refuses to acknowledge a filename change. No, I have not tested it. Ken

+2 ,,,,,,

Yeah, tooltips would be great. Under the name of the weapon (great addition, btw), having the ammo the weapon uses would be nice. A tooltip for the ammo bars so that it shows the number and type of rounds would also be huge. That full bar for grenades for a single man may mean a different thing than a full bar for grenades for a USMC squad. (Actually, I _think_ it does mean a different absolute number. Shrug.) All of this is tracked in the game. The player wouldn't have more control, merely a more informative interface. This would be a great port over to the rest of the CMx2 line. Ken

Yes, several tests confirmed this. Only tested for Soviets.

Gents, I'm trying to sort the correct load-out for my guys. I've found that the ammo bars for the units seem to follow this pattern: the left-most ammo bars correspond to 5.45mm ammo; the linked ammo bar correspond to 7.62x39 AND 7.62x54R ammo. That covers most (if not all) of the Soviet small arms. Has anyone tried figuring out which ammo bars correspond to which Muj ammo? Thanks, Ken

!?!!? When were those complaints aired? (Or was it an internal function of BF.C's testing?) I still hold to my entmoot comments of...let me search...ah, here it is; May of 200_8_! http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=74625 So, for two and a half years (at least) the trees in game have been nigh on impervious to many rounds. Yes, leaves can be stripped off. (That is cool, by the way.) But branches suffer no effects from any amount of HE. Apparently, only a trunk hit affects the tree. I'd love to see another of my tank's main gun rounds hit a branch, but then see that branch or tree be destroyed. Clearing a fire zone of vegetation would be impressive. As it is, HE vs. trees mean the tree wins. I'm still curious: when were trees deemed too flimsy? Thanks, Ken (Hey, isn't it a good sign to be down to THIS type of detail about this game?)

Cool. Thanks for the bone. As for brewing up Shermans, we will see better burning animations, right? Especially flames coming up from hatches! And smoke from hatches. Any flame bones? C'mon, you KNEW we'd want more! Thanks, Ken