c3k

waiting for the "Hogan!!!" sound mod...

First, thanks for latest module. All is good. What follows is a request for FUTURE games. Merely a request. Something to think about. I use (cough, mumble)'s icon mod. The Nato unit symbology adds a bit of immersion for me. However, the icons do not differentiate between heavy or medium machineguns, for example. The same is true of tanks. The icons are the same for a wide variety of units. For the default game, the symbology of men or missiles or tanks in the icons is fine. However, is there a way to tag each unit's icon to a separate file? Let's use CM:Normandy as an example. The default game could show a tank silhouette as the icon for every tank. Yet, we all know there's a huge difference between a light German PzKpfwII and the fun Tigers. The mod community (THANKS GUYS!) could release a mod replacing the default icon with the icon for a light tank, but only for the PzKpfwII. The heavy tank icon (more crossbars in it) would be used for, you guessed it, heavy tanks like the Tiger. This would mean more icon files. It would also mean a light mortar would have a possible different icon than a medium or heavy mortar. Is this even a consideration? Thanks, Ken

Yes, that's ANOTHER bonus for pre-ordering: CM:Nato, a free Installer, AND a fresh(er) patch!! Ken

The armies of Canada, Germany, and The Netherlands are securely ensconced upon my hard-drive, soon to be unleashed...

C'mon! Haven't you guys figured out the secret nature of the bone from that video? Yeah, baby, you guessed it! CM:Nato will introduce CRATES!!! Finally, we can battle over docks. We can battle in warehouses. We can stack crates to solve puzzles. BF.C has finally joined the FPS crate craze! Cool. Ken

Okay, another try at the linkies.... http://battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=83664 http://battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=84222 http://battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=86105 http://battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=88755 Fingers crossed....

The Marder chassis "sitback" when firing the 20mm seemed a bit much. Mind you, I have NEVER seen a real Marder firing, so they may have a very weak suspension. Or, that 20mm may have a stupendous recoil. Like I said, the "feel" of the visual seems off. Ken

There's room for improvement. Here are some old threads. From this thread http://battlefront.com/community/sho...ight=artillery -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Good morning, Sir! You're back from the Brigade meeting sooner than I expected. What's the word for today?" asked the Artillery Battalion's First Sergeant. "Well," replied the Artillery Battalion Commander, "Brigade is going to push hard this way." He emphasized the direction by smacking the situation map. "We're going to be on tap to provide support for the lead battalion. The plan is for them to take this village, here." So saying, he pointed his laser pointer right at the village on the map. "We'll have 2 hours till it kicks off. Let's get a rough plan going." "Yes, Sir!" said the First Sergeant. The Commander and First Sergeant then planned how to support the operation. They brought in the staff, prepped the men, ammoed the guns, laid in all the things that need laying. In short, a crack team of professionals went about their business. Two hours later... "Any word, Sparks?" asked the Commander of the radio net chief. "Ah, just a minute, sir. Something's just coming in. I'll put it on speaker!" "Arty support! We need arty support! This is zebra06, requesting a fire mission, come in!" squawked the radio. "My God, man!! That's what we've been preparing for!" shouted the Commander. "Answer him, dammit, Sparks!" Sparks keyed the mike: "Go ahead Zebra06, this is your Arty support. We've been humping ammo all day, waiting for your call!" The voice replied, "Zebra06, requesting 2 tubes of 155, medium duration, medium attack, personnel, area target at coordinates AB123456. I say again, 2 tubes, medium, medium, personnel, area, at AB123456. Over." "Hang on there Sparks," said the Commander. "First Sergeant. How long will it take us to figure out how to get a round over to AB123456. Isn't that the area we were briefed to expect?" "Yes, sir! That's right where we expected the support call! We're ready. Let me look up the response time in the charts..." Quickly, the First Sergeant flipped through his charts. "I've got the answer, sir! Ten minutes!!" "What? Ten minutes?" queried the Commander. "Yes sir. Ten minutes." was the reply. "Very well." The Commander turned to Sparks. "Tell them their arty support will be there in ten minutes." Sparks did just that... The radio crackled, "WHAT!?!? We're getting nailed. I SAW you at the Brigade meeting. What have you been doing all day!!!" The Commander grabbed the mike, "Sorry, we're doing our best. Ten minutes. Oh, and we only have enough ammo for, say, two of those medium/medium missions. We got tired carrying those heavy things." Another thread: http://battlefront.com/community/sho...ight=artillery And, http://battlefront.com/community/sho...ight=artillery Last, http://battlefront.com/community/sho...ight=artillery Thoughts? Ken

Deleted, due to doltish double-post dumbness. Wrong thread. Do'h.

Time to start the NEXT thread: "BF.C, place Phil Stanbridge's order LAST in the queue!" Ken

Woot!! A bone! BF.C is going to include AN INSTALLER!

CM:BN (Beyond Normandy?) CM:NaB (Normandy and Beyond?) CM:TTHFoN (The Tangled Hedgerow Fields of Normandy?)

WeGo for me. The ability to reposition waypoints would be a great boon. The lack of that ability is relatively minor. Ken

I would think that Stukas would be a different kettle of fish. They were used quite extensively against enemy command and control nodes, as well as striking targets at the front line. Thoughts?

Steve, Outstanding! Glad to hear you've, once again, taken a suggestion of mine and included it in patch. Without trying to nerf grenades too much, any chance on reducing accuracy/range? Or, at least making accuracy inversely proportional to range? (Even cooler would be changing max range based on the posture of the individual throwing the grenade.) I won't even DARE to inquire about allowing grenades to carom off of trees or other undergrowth. Thanks, Ken

The more I cogitate upon this matter, the more convinced I am that, the physics of game grenades aside, the main point is the UNIT as a whole deciding to throw multiple grenades simultaneously against their foe. Ken

The early brakes were woefully underpowered. The designers implemented a mod. These are aerodynamic brakes. Notice the large one under the glacis? The -2 version incorporated variable aerodynamic brakes based on steering inputs from the driver. Later, it was discovered these were not as effective at speeds normally encountered.

A few points. Assault gives a morale bonus, does it not? So the men are less likely to pin or run back if they get fired on. They do move as teams, bounding forward, so if you don't want a single team to be isolated, QUICK may be more appropriate. (Of course, I think QUICK makes the men more vulnerable so instead of losing a team under ADVANCE, you may lose the whole squad.) Plot a point just short of the structure to be entered. TARGET LIGHT at the structure, with a PAUSE of 5-15 or more seconds. That allows them to fire. Then QUICK or ADVANCE into the structure. I've been using short COVERED ARC (360 degree) commands at the final waypoint. If you do not add any target command, it seems like the men will continue with the target command from the previous waypoint, be it TARGET or TARGET LIGHT. (The problem with TARGET when men are about to enter is that TARGET unleashes squad rocket launchers. Those have a high likelihood of creating friendly casualties.) If you FACE after you enter the structure, your men will have their backs to any enemy left alive in it. I only use HUNT when the entire movement path is in cover/concealment. That way, when my men freeze upon sighting the enemy they won't be chewed up being stuck in the open. Regards, Ken

A test: I don't have a grenade to test throw, but my wife does have an 8 pound cat. Using a feline-body-grip and side-arm technique I successfully threw the cat approximately 25 feet.* No further tests were run.** Extrapolating out, the cat being 8 times heavier than an M67 grenade, we can assume that the distance a grenade could be thrown would be 8 times more than the test cat. 8 times 25 feet does, indeed, yield 200 feet. * - The distance is only approximate: the cat did not remain stationary while I ran a tape measure the spotted landing point. ** - The test could not be duplicated. The cat ran off and remains missing. The favored throwing arm has been rendered sub-optimal for further testing due to multiple, deep, bleeding furrows being scored into the flesh of the forearm. Okay, joking aside, I DO have a point. The barrage of contact-fused grenades seems a bit too effective. The grenades seem to explode, not on contact, but once they stop moving. A hit, a bounce, a roll....BOOM. (They may, indeed, be individually timed, but the consistency of exploding based on stopping seems to argue against that.) However, the single biggest factor seems to be the algorithm which calculates when a unit should throw grenades. It seems to be done on a UNIT basis, not an individual. So, when a unit of 7 men gets the "THROW GRENADES" code, all 7 men throw grenades simultaneously. Would it not be a tad more realistic if this were done on a man by man basis? An anecdote: a pre-positioned, but not dug-in, Marine unit met an attack of Syrians. The Marines were in a tree line (light) facing the anticipated enemy. The Marines were unsuppressed. They consisted of 2 full squads and 2 mounted M240G machineguns, plus the 2 man platoon HQ. The Syrians advanced (QUICK?) over OPEN ground. The Syrians, taking casualties, halted and threw a grenade barrage. Over 20 were thrown in a few seconds. The Marines suffered 15 casualties (KIA, Heavy WIA, Light WIA). The Marines were TOTALLY suppressed/Pinned. More mayhem followed. Another quick check showed walls being ineffective vs. grenades. The grenades ROLL through walls, rendering stone walls ineffective. (I know, they do this as well through building walls and roofs.) Am I totally off base by thinking that the grenade thing is just a bit too much of a good thing? Thanks, Ken

Wicky, I like it... I'm waiting for the animation of a Syrian running forward, arm windmilling, bowling that grenade (RGD-5?) at the head of the unfortunate Marine he's spotted. "Thunk" "Boom" "Aaaaaahhhhhh, I'm hit!" A bit of sluething turned up this: "The M67 can be thrown about 50 to 60 meters by the average soldier." Now, it's from Wikipedia. 200 feet? Average? C'mon. Go grab something that weighs a pound and see how far you can throw it. For example, an average baseball weighs around 145 grams and the M67 grenade weighs 400 grams. Take 2 3/4 baseballs, tape them together, and let me know how far they go. Have you ever seen someone who is not a pitcher try to throw an opening pitch? It's only got to go 60 1/2 feet (about 18 meters). A lot of one-bouncers out there. For a visual, the distance from home plate to second base is 127' 3 3/8". So, look at a ball field and image the catcher throwing, not just to second base, but adding the distance from home to the pitcher's mound BEYOND second base; 127+60=187 feet. That's how far the AVERAGE grenade thrower can throw? Sheesh. The M67 weighs 14 ounces: mash 4 quarter pounder burgers together (after removing one bun), that should be about right. Can you throw it 200 feet...ON AVERAGE? How about a decent wrench? Don't spin it like a stick grenade, that'd be cheating. Hurl it. Do it while you're lying prone. 200 feet? Ken "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball!"

I have noticed too many instances of the "rain of grenades" where a squad throws about 2 grenades per man simultaneously. Now, I can rationalize it in close terrain, be it heavy woods or urban areas. Especially if they've closed to a group of enemy they can see. (I like being able to grenade a building before I storm it, but could I PLEASE only have a few grenades (1, 2?) instead of a dozen? This is a gripe for TARGET LIGHT with no known enemy. But that's grist for a different mill.) What I am "curious" about is the maximum game RANGE of the thrown grenade. I've only thrown a few live grenades in training. I don't think I'm a pussy, but there's NO way I could throw it the 100+ feet I'm seeing in-game. Or do I need to work on my shoulders some more? (A quick measurement shows 48m and 59m for two throws. That's 158 feet and 194 feet! Oh, and they were throwing UPHILL. ) So, I'm sure there are a lot of guys out there with FAR more grenade throwing experience than I have. How far can you throw one? How accurately? Not only do these in-game athletes throw the grenades that far, but their accuracy is better than most MLB pitchers! I mean, under fire, life or death, obscurants filling the air, targets behind shrubs, brush and trees, and these OLYMPIANS manage to hurl their bomblets 35 meters to land RIGHT ON the cluster of 3 men!! Oh, and they've timed the fuse so it explodes IMMEDIATELY! "Cook it, cook it, easy, cook it, throw it...NOW!" Contact fused? As for the contact detonation, a timer for each grenade (I know, I know, CPU cycles...) would be a nice to have feature. It could cause some grenades on their ballistic trajectory to explode before reentry. Airburst, cool. It could ALLOW the poor SOB who just had a grenade hit his helmet a chance at scurrying out of the way. Or the cluster of men a similar chance of improving their survival odds. Okay, yeah, too late, the series is closing out, etc., etc., but I felt this needed to be brought up. It has NOTHING to do with my losing over half of two separate Marine squads to a couple of Syrian Olympic Grenade Throwers. Grrrr. Ken

Yes, you may be tempted by that newer, sleeker, foreign ass, but you'll be happier in the long run with the large ass you've grown accustomed to.

Oh, aye, I'd be annoyed if it weren't my own fault, but, should we run a poll to see how many people read all the lawyer garbage when ordering from a company we trust? Moon, first, thanks for taking the time to read and respond. A small point, I'm sure, but you mentioned that the shipping policy was on my CONFIRMATION email. Wouldn't I have gotten that AFTER I'd placed my order? Meaning, I wouldn't have known about that policy until AFTER I'd sent my electrons your way? (FWIW, I DID receive a confirmation about how to DOWNLOAD the UNAVAILABLE NATO, but it said nothing about your shipping policy. I have searched my email folders far and wide and I cannot find any other confirmation email. Shrug. It is no matter.) And yes, in hindsight, being 20/20 and all, it does make sense that BF.C is only able to save on shipping by PHYSICALLY bundling the items. In my defense, I was not thinking rationally. Once I saw that CM:A _and_ NATO pre-order were available, I knew that time was of the essence. If I was too slow clicking and typing, the stocks might've been depleted before I was able to place my order. I blame BF.C for making me so eager to order their games. Now, back to you, Moon. I suggest you add the floating nymphs forthwith to your ordering page, complete with sparkling wands spelling out your policies. Read the legal notice? C'mon, I had tears in my eyes on that one. (You're probably one of those players who actually reads the briefings before plunging into the battle you've just started! The attack has a spirit all its own!) Give me nymphs and I'll give you my attention. To the point of my original post: this is meant to INFORM others that they may have to wait if they go with the BUNDLE. I certainly don't mean to say this is some sort of unfair business practice, nor am I trying to shift the blame for my overeagerness. I now ask that those of you who have this game start posting more AAR's in the appropriate forum. The only way I can bear the burden of waiting will be to hear your tales of Shilkas, Spetsnaz, and Muj. (For me, I'm off to grumble about mansard roofs in the CM:N threads!) Later, Ken

Grrrrr, Okay, this is a "heads up" to anyone else out there. I wish I'd known this before I'd placed my order, so consider this as free information. Two weeks ago, seeing the just released CM:A announcement, I clicked the links. I saw the "pre-order NATO and save shipping" link. I clicked. I read the links. I ordered. I waited. I waited. I waited. I emailed BF.C. I was educated. I like hard copies. Digital downloads are nice, but given a choice between one or the other, a physical product will always win for me. If I have to pay more for both a digital AND a physical product, well, I'll save my money and opt for the physical. (I've reinstalled too many computer systems, run too many backups that mysteriously didn't take and had too many hard-drive failures in my life to think a virtual anything is as safe as a physical thing.) So, I pre-ordered NATO and ordered hard-copy of CM:A. Shipping listed as $11 (just like Moon posted in reply to someone's question, elsewhere). Here's what I learned: If you "bundle" an order to save shipping, you have to wait until ALL the bundled items are available. My copy of CM:A won't ship until NATO is released. Grrrrrr. Now, that's fine. (Okay, not really, but I accept it.) I only wish that SOMEWHERE on the ordering site I would've seen some sort of NOTICE that by bundling with a PREORDER that I'd have to wait. Obviously, if that sort of notice even exists, I never saw it. Yes, I read the pages I visited. Did I miss something obvious? Perhaps a notice on the shopping cart page that SHIPPING WILL BE DELAYED UNTIL ALL PRODUCTS ARE AVAILABLE could be added? You know, in neon colors, flashing, with floating nymphs writing the words from the tips of their sparkling wands. Something? Perhaps I'm a bit too old-school by ordering a physical copy. Maybe that isn't something many others do. Shrug. I'm posting this to spread information, not to bitch. (No, I don't want to take money from BF.C's shipping costs.) Regards, Ken

That has been my approach since day 1. I just try to keep units where I'd put them if it were real life. 2 up, 1 back, an Hq near the decisive point and hope it all works the way it's supposed to. Regards, Ken