Erwin

Yes. That would be good for vehicles as well as AT teams. Often one wants a team or vehicle (eg: fast tank destroyer) to wait until a target shows up, fire at it and then immediately run and hide (not fire, thus exposing itself, then sit around to be spotted and killed).

Fun site. Thanks John.

+1 Hate for you to get overworked/frustrated trying to deal with trivial issues and get burned out as has happened to other talented modders.

Sounds like it could be a clever way to simulate a house/basement bunker.

Been very aware of this trick for years. However, it doesn't always work as advertised. Have wasted many charges this way. Not sure what success depends on. Maybe the angle the obstruction is relative to the map/action square. Re ammo, it's agreed that the simplest method to avoid running out of ammo is to load up at set-up. However, it bothers me re realism to have a squad carrying so many extra thousands of rounds - maybe 700-1000+ rounds per man - as it doesn't seem as if the game sufficiently penalizes the mobility of such a heavily laden unit. So, my SOP is to not have the average trooper carry much more than 400 rounds each (esp if they also have RPG's etc). In many scenarios I have played one has to send a supply truck to resupply (eg MOS's excellent Tactical Ops Center scenario) and it is a PITA to have to resupply a company from a single supply vehicle when one has to SPLIT, MOUNT, ACQUIRE, DISEMBARK, RECOMBINE as many as 9+ squads. "Everyone would like to save time on everything, but that doesn't mean the devs should waste time trying to save everyone some time." Completely understand this POV. Obviously different players have different priorities. Some of us believe that the UI challenge is becoming more and more of an important priority in terms of streamlining the mechanics of play, esp as scenarios get larger with more units, as the game itself is pretty dam good as is. All we're saying is that we want to spend more time on the "fun" tactical challenges of the game and less time trying to manipulate the UI to do basic tasks.

Didn't even notice that aspect, Mord. But, yes now you mention it, the armor commander has a more sophisticated/realistic face coloring and does look better.

"So they go, hop in, grab the items." Except in game terms there should be no need to "hop in" in order to ACQUIRE other than eye candy (unless one wants the unit(s) to actually embark for transport elsewhere). ACQUIRE to and from adjacent units is what we're talking about. This would eliminate the wasted time and irritation of clicking in order to split units, embark units, disembark units and have them recombine... merely in order to resupply a number of units simultaneously.

Could have taken advantage of his privileged position and political contacts to get released as POW early but refused to leave his comrades. Heroic.

He looks fine even though (am assuming ) you think he's out of place cos his body and face are facing a different direction. If all the pics look as if they are the same but one has photoshopped different headwear or jacket on em, it actually makes it a little harder to distinguish them apart when one quickly glances at them. And let's face it, players don't spend a lot of time staring at these portraits. Perhaps move on to something else and if this image is still irritating when all else is completed redo at that time.

Oliver: Agreed, and thank you for your clarification... "...such things are possible but the amount in user interface actions required to accomplish those tasks is maybe excessive. They are taking numerous turns/clicks to carry out when with an more streamlined user interface that could be halved." Perhaps I wasn't as clear as you have been in your above statement. Those of us who play CM2 a lot, increasingly find the above UI issues increasingly irritating.

Would highly recommend Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Oman, Turkey etc right now. Tourists are scared and stay away so hotels and tourist sites are empty and cheap. Where previously one would have waited in 4 hour lines to get in to see anything, there are no lines at any of Egypt's pyramids, temples or at Jordan's Petra etc. I thought the places very safe so long as one doesn't mind seeing lots of armed guards and troops wandering around or at checkpoints. These countries need foreign currency and love tourists as their tourist industries are in terrible shape. (They do just about anything to keep the few tourists they have safe... Seriously.) One may be more in danger if on a bus tour as that has a schedule and is a potential fat target. But, if you are alone or with one or two buddies, you can move quickly and be unpredictable.

+1 Have long argued that CM is now very good as a game. What development should now focus on is a streamlined UI so that less time is wasted trying to accomplish exactly what Bulletpoint outlined. Just a few other examples that would speed up gameplay and enable player to focus on the fun parts of playing rather than UI: "Shoot and scoot" for AT teams so they can fire and run, not sit around waiting to die after firing. Engineers who blast a wall but do NOT run thru it. (Currently we have to time it out so they blast right at the end of a turn.) One click 180 degree covered arcs (like we had in CM1!) so one doesn't have to waste so much time performing dozens of clicks just to get a company of turreted armor moving from waypoint to waypoint with guns pointed in different directions. A new ACQUIRE system that allows adjacent units to exchange (reasonable amounts of) ammo (with time penalties). Right now in order to resupply a platoon or larger efficiently one has to: 1) split teams; 2) order teams to board vehicle; 3) ACQUIRE; 4) Disembark; 5) move to their respective squads for recombination. There are many other examples that would benefit from a streamlined UI.

Using MOS's concepts pioneered in TOC, it could work. In TOC, one acquires intel from different sources and in different ways and this gives the player (hard) choices as to what priority actions to take next and which are less urgent - ie: have to triage. (have to deal with lots of "hit & run" events.) These decisions/choices in turn can lead to different outcomes etc. It's perfect for COIN and while TOC is not a MOUT game, it could be. In related news of Sgt Chapman getting MOH for actions during Op Anaconda in Afghanistan - highly recommend reading "Not a Good Day To Die" by Sean Naylor about the fiasco of that operation. Chapman's story is a significant and memorable part of the book. The many diverse moving parts of Anaconda would make an xnt fictionalized scenario or campaign as they involved battling Taliban and Al Qaeda on the Pakistan border with Afghan Army as well as many different spec ops forces including SEALs, Delta, 10th Mountain plus CIA units. The 101 airborne were also considered but kept home for other emergencies. But, in a scenario or campaign they would be appropriate.

Church... Uh... For you oldsters not familiar with slang: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=church.

+2 re TOC. The best scenario I have played - incorporates brilliant concepts by MOS that turns CMBS into a new game experience. Hope to see the ideas emulated in other CM2 families esp for COIN ops.

Agreed. It's what one needs to give a flavor. Not worth spending too much time on something one barely looks at after the first few minutes of admiration. Good job, and move on.

+1. Altho the writing will be backwards and will say something like "Paul is dead" or somesuch. Seriously tho' I cannot say that the black hood against the flag has improved. Either the hood graphics need to be crisper (if possible) or maybe make the hood more dark gray than black and then give it a dark black outline like women's mascara to pop it out from the flag. Or vice versa... make the flag lighter than the hood (since it's in the BG).

It looks like that's what some want. Ideally BF should set up a permanent video link broadcasting Steve and/or the BF team working, eating, sleeping etc. just so those who have to know what is going on minute by minute could have gratification. Is this a generational phenomenon? Some of us (seemingly older guys who have been camp followers since CM1 days) have no problem getting on with our lives for several months without any briefings from BF. Others (social media generation) apparently require more interaction... Maybe we need to feel sorry for them actually. The ability to switch off and NOT be bombarded by info all the time is a wonderful luxury imo.

By process of elimination: The guy with the cap says "Armor". Plain helmet and uniform says "Regular Inf". That leaves the netting. But what about camo helmet and uniform? Or is that reserved for SS? To distinguish between inf and armored inf, how about goggles for the mech troops?

OMG. This is why am very happy to pay BF for well-developed scenarios and especially campaigns.

Same though here. Maybe highlight/give shadows to give a more 3D looking image to separate the hood from the flag?

Some of these would be useful as it would save wasting time on issuing complex orders "manually". But most allow for an unreasonable amount of micromanagement and control that is very unrealistic. In RL, there are always folks who don't get the message, didn't notice they were being shot at, get the time wrong, don't coordinate properly etc. The CM system does a good job (whether intended or not) of simulating fog of war and confusion. I started with CM1 and thought that RT was the only way to play. But as I gained experience, realized that RT gives one way too much control and after that only play WEGO.

Yes... Irritating that the cost of one super duper aircraft or a few advanced tanks that may never see service would probably pay for every soldier to have the best equipment - since they are the ones who are about 100% sure to see combat since they're fighting already. But, yes... My experience in defense industry a decade or more ago was that the big profits are in the nuke subs and other major weapons systems (along with the massive billing for training and maintenance/spare parts etc.), and it was extremely unpopular to air the view that what was needed in the real world of COIN vs UNCONS was more (relatively inexpensive) spec ops units with (relatively inexpensive) support gear. The profits were just not as compelling.

One also has to look at the complexity issue. The examples above are of relatively simple top down 2D games that have well-established engines. What BF has successfully accomplished is to create families of complex 3D games based on their own very unique proprietary engine with good AI that normally would take a much larger team and a much larger budget. It's as if BF was competing with a huge outfit like MS. It is not surprising (to me at least) that BF is fully time-committed to completing their (relative to the games noted above) very complex CM2 tasks. Perhaps the issue here is that folks who love social media and expect 2 b in constant communication with others and having instant info gratification find it hard to be out of contact.

M27 is supposed to be accurate to within 12 inches at 600 yards (so less heavy ammo required to be carried). Can fire longer than M249 b4 overheating, 10 lb vs 22 lb. Sounds great. What puzzles me is why the same weapons, if they are the best as stated in the article, are not used uniformly by all armed services.