c3k

If it's only vegetation, I'd be disappointed if there were ANY statistically significant changes to casualty levels. If concealment is assumed and area fire is used, then the saturation level of any area should be equal. Now, if you're trying to test varying levels of COVER, that'd be different. CONCEALMENT hides from view, COVER protects from fire. Concealment shouldn't matter. If I see a tarp covering an 8m x 8m area of ground and I know there are 9 Syrians in there, I'm going to spray and pray. If I see an 8m x 8m area covered in friggin' lilacs and I know there are 9 Syrians in there, I'm going to spray and pray. In either case, the ammo expended is what counts. So, let's break the concealment and cover aspects from each other. I AM interested in levels of COVER and how the game models casualty rates due to varying incoming firepower. Regards, Ken

Pandur, Dude - you obviously forgot to use the ACQUIRE -> Vehicle Keys order. They couldn't drive off until they got the right car keys. The gunner had them. Seriously, thanks for finding this. Maybe it depends on whether any of the original crew survived? Regards, Ken

Oh, you must've been playing Syrian. The gamma is much brighter when you're the US. Regards, Ken

Nor for me. Unless.... To counter the lethality issues, why not have a switch which turns bullets into paintballs? Then, at the end of a scenario you could zoom in and see all the color splotches on your men? (Use paintBAGS to simulate the large guns and grenades.) Regards, Ken

Don't the Strykers use IR blocking smoke? Regards, Ken

I have the scenario in which this problem gets replicated. I tried to create another scenario, but to no avail. The differences were terrain, setup zone, presence of enemy, and specific PLATOON and COMPANY used. I can try to isolate all the variables. It could be something as minute as only 3rd squad, 3rd platoon, C company. BF.C, any interest in my tracking this down? Or, has it already been discovered? I ask because it seems like there are other isolated instances, such as the one you mentioned. Let me know. Thanks. 1.06, Ken

Bump.

Agreed. It's been toned down, but LOF still clips terrain. See my crestline thread. 1.06, Ken

Echo, Yeah, somewhere theres a limit where you load your men down and then "crack!", a femur snaps. Then you let them take something off. I was going to dig around for the weight of bulk ammo, but never got to it. We'll accept your figure for the nonce. (Note: I found some weights and dispute your numbers; see the bottom of this post.) I like the burden I put on the 9 man squad. 8 Javelins (but the game only shows one - no one had the launcher. I thought it would take up a slot and not add enough weight), plus ~13k additional 5.56 ammo. Less of a load per man than the MMG team. (I used the 3 man team for the heavy load to exacerbate the disparity.) For the suspension of disbelief crowd, perhaps one guy keeps shuffling back and forth with piles of ammo... Edited to add the following: I've just found some weights on, sorry, Wikipedia. They list 5.56x45mm as 3.95-5.18 g/round (depending on specific round) and 7.62x51mm as 9.33g/r. So, after some simple math we have: 13,000 rounds of 7.62x51 = 123 kilograms or 269 pounds (differences due to rounding 269 #'s is the more accurate). 269 pounds on 3 men = an additional 90 pounds each. Hard, very hard, but doable. Think of slinging a wounded buddy on your back. A skinny buddy. As for the 5.56, doing the same math and using 5g as the weight and using 9 men we have: a paltry 7.2kg or 16 pounds per man. Bah. That's less weight than the porn mags in their rucks. Wikipedia lists the Javelin missile as weighing 26 pounds. Total plus-up of 42 pounds. It'll wear you out, but short sprints and long marches can be done. Again, all according to Wikipedia. It sucks to hump a machinegun. Regards, Ken [ December 22, 2007, 05:18 AM: Message edited by: c3k ]

Kudos. I've just run some tests. I took a dismounted Stryker platoon and "acquired" some extra ammo. One MMG team was laden with over 13k 7.62 rounds. The other, 700 rounds. One squad "acquired" all 5.56 rounds from 4 Strykers (12.8k ?), plus 8 Javelins. That was in addition to their normal load-out. Then, I QUICKED the entire platoon 500 meters. The laden men kept up. At first. Then, they strung out, with the lead men keeping up with their lightly loaded brethren. A few minutes later, they stopped QUICK-ing and started MOVE-ing. The loaded men were either "Fatigued" or "Exhausted" whilst the others were merely "Tired". This was nicely modelled. Thanks. Regards, Ken

My experience: With q6600, 8800gtx, vista64 ultimate: CMBB unplayable due to graphic corruption. Black background and multiple-rendered units. Meaning, a tank may show in game. If I rotate or move, the original tank location stays, as does every single frame of tank being drawn. This leads to several hundred tanks showing all over the place, clipped into each other. Does that make sense? Still waiting, and hoping, for a fix. Regards, Ken

In-game accuracy tweaking knobs or sliders? NO WAY! Ugh. How about variable armor stats as well? Just my .02. Regards, Ken

"Sergeant! The American Imperialist Invader's Bradleys are coming down our avenue! President Assad has ordered us to defend it to the end!" "Yes, corporal. You are correct. But sadly we have nothing to fight against that armor." "Sergeant! I have, right here next to me as we sit on the roof-top, the latest Soviet model of the AT-13! It can cut through the American armor like a hot knife through a schwarma!" "Oh, but corporal, that AT-13 is useless to us here on our roof. Alas for us..." "But Sergeant! Why is it useless?" "Oh, corporal, because it MUST be set up on its diminutive tripod in order to fire. Damascus will fall...." "But Sergeant! I can set it up on its tripod here on this roof-edge wall! Or even over here, on top of this roof-top water tank! Or HERE, on this roof-top air handler! Or OVER HERE on top of Assan's willing back as he hunches ape-like willing to be scorched by the perdition-like flames of purity from our AT-13!" "Corporal! None of that is according to doctrine! I will not tolerate that type of capitalist corruption in MY squad. I find you guilty of subversion!" Bang, bang, bang! .... Perhaps soldiers can innovate, adapt and overcome? Maybe loosening some of the firing restrictions would be beneficial? Regards. 1.06, Ken

Gents, I've finally gotten around to the training campaign. My Javelins knocked out the Syrian T-54's. One of the crewmen survived (well, for a few minutes anyway). I was playing at "Basic" difficulty, so I had total information on the Opfor. The surviving crewman was depicted with an AK-74, yet the unit information screen showed him having a handgun (PM). He died before I could advance anyone close enough to allow him to return fire to find out which weapon the game would use (single rounds, close range versus faster automatic fire at longer range?). Thanks. 1.06, Ken

Steve et al., Okay, I've played with v1.05 and the "glitch" is still there. At start, at the beginning of the setup phase, the Syrian tank is visible for about a second and then, depending on difficulty and intel levels, is replaced with a "?" icon or disappears. Yet, IT IS TOTALLY VISIBLE FOR THE FIRST SECOND. Has anyone else noticed this? 8800GTX with 169.09 driver. Vista64 Ultimate. Thanks, Ken

aka_tom_w, Regarding your football field analogy and your ability to shoot: how do you think your accuracy would be affected if those 9 guys AND THEIR 21 FRIENDS were shooting at you and your friends? Heart-pounding, stomach-flipping, leg-shaking, sweaty-palmed, afraid-to-die, adrenalin. Yeah baby! Regards, Ken

Phillip, It's a simple homemade scenario. I selected one dismounted US Stryker platoon and one Syrian Reserve platoon. I placed intervening terrain between them. Night time. The sole purpose was to familiarize myself with the game. If you'd like, I can send you the scenario. I'll try to gin up a quick savegame. Thanks, Ken

Okay, to answer the obvious question, YES, I tried a search. I'm confused on the utility of the various split squad commands. In order; Split Teams: this seems basic, a roughly even split of the squad along the lines of the squad organization shown on the unit menu. Fine. Assault Team (sic The "s" is missing from Team in game): this is SUPPOSED to split the squad into a heavier support element and a lighter assault element. I don't see it. The US ends up with the same firepower split as Split Teams: team a; M4A1, M249, M203, M4A1 w/scope: team b; M4A1x2, M249, M203, M4A1 w/scope. I DON'T SEE ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIREPOWER BETWEEN THESE TWO TEAMS. Anyone? Antitank Team: this seems obvious, yet all I see is a two man element, and one AT-4 (?). The other squad organic AT-4 (?) stays with the other seven men. I assume adding a Javelin would ensure this weapon splits out. I'll do some more testing. RECOMBINING. On foot, recombining the teams seems to work well. Much better than CMx1. However, if I put both teams from the same squad in a vehicle, THEY WILL NOT RECOMBINE! Anyone? Thanks. 1.06, Ken

Gents, I've been playing with a single US platoon. In it, I've noticed a squad- usually 3rd squad - losing command. I double click on the HQ and all units except 3rd squad get their icons highlighted. Selecting 3rd squad shows no command icons - the eyeball, yelling mouth, pda thing, and that other electronic thingie. (tip tool anyone?) The conditions are night, crack, there is NO incoming fire nor has there been. In all cases 3rd squad stays out of command no matter the range to HQ. Even with the HQ element INSIDE the squad, it stays out of command. This includes having the squad leader ON TOP OF the platoon leader (don't ask...don't tell). Has anyone else seen this? I have replicated this. Thanks. 1.06, Ken

Hmmm, I always wondered what "readme" meant.... Thanks! Ken

JonS, Thank you! I'm sure that's written somewhere, but I couldn't find it in the PDF manual. Regards, Ken

Gents, Can anyone tell me the difference in game mechanics between the two colors for target lines? Thanks, Ken

To add to the above, I have a solution (if I've described the issue correctly). The 1.5 meter hovering target line is a good approximation for the aimpoint of most standing, kneeling, crouching, sitting soldiers. Kneeling may be more accurately represented at 1 meter; standing could be done at 1.75 meters. Etc. 1.5 meters is a good compromise. However, PRONE men, whether targets or shooters are FAR from 1.5 meters. In game, this makes a difference. My solution: for PRONE men, adjust the 1.5 meter "compromise" height to something closer to the ground. .1 meter? Can this be done? I have no clue. If it can be done, how hard is it? I have even less of a clue. BF.C? Anyone? 1.06, Ken

Gents (and BF.C), I think I've stumbled onto the source of several different "undocumented features" and causes of player complaint. The end of a Target Line floats about 1.5 meters in the air. Why is this a problem? There a several reasons. First, let's start with the basics. We all assume that if A=B, then obviously, B=A. This is not necessarily true. (Someone else can start a thread about the 11 dimensions and the direction of time.) So, disregard the seemingly obvious that LOS is recipricol. If I can see him, he may NOT be able to see me. Case in point: I complained about seemingly incredible headshots at 170 meters against fleeting targets, showing only their heads. Now, if the LOS (used interchangably with LOF, target point, etc.) ends at 1.5 meters OVER the target, then the crest line used as cover does NOT provide that cover. It LOOKS like the target, behind a crest line, prone, is covered. If, instead, the game projects the target as being 1.5 meters in the air ABOVE the unit base icons, then the targets are VERY VISIBLE AND PRONE TO FIRE. Now, it looks like the START point of the LOS floats in the air and the END point "snaps" to an action spot, anchored on the ground. Is this really how it works? I SEE my men firing from ground level, when prone, but the Target Line (LOS) starts 1.5 meters over their heads. WHICH REPRESENTATION IS CORRECT? If the Target Line for outgoing fire STARTS 1.5 meters in the air, does INCOMING fire END 1.5 meters in the air? If so, this answers many of the oddities caused by terrain and fire interactions. It also provides a reason for what seems like unrealistic accuracy. Instead of the incredible headshot, the game may be representing a more realistic shot versus an exposed torso in sight for tens of seconds. BF.C? Anyone? 1.06, Ken