Erwin

If we didn't have dissatisfied people we'd still be living in caves... With no CM2 to play. Isn't that how CM series came about?

If you still have a fiancée, you're not playing the game properly.

So, either the Jav had a lot more propellant than required for 2200m, or it glided to the target(?) Interesting either way.

You may have corrupted files or out of date mods. I have experienced similar a few times. I either removed old mods, or did a complete reinstall.

Worked up? Am simply making a comment. It's been 10+ years since CMSF and the tech of monitors has advanced to higher and higher resolutions. It's odd that after all these years we have to run degraded resolutions to be able to read the UI. In order to read the UI, I have to run CM2 1600x900 on a 30" monitor capable of approx. 2700x1600. (Or is it that BF has found that most customers still have low resolution monitors?) Have often said that the game itself is just fine the way it is. The UI is the major problem now.

This is definitely the best tactic. The challenge is that it's rare to have that sort of LOS in the European CM2 titles. Most maps are not large enuff. CMSF is wonderful for featuring long range 1,000m+ LOS maps. That and the lovely sunshine is a major reason (for me at least) that a WW2 North Africa CM2 title is sorely missed and why CMSF2 is being looked forward to with eager anticipation.

Dear god... why...?

The topic addresses WW2 era accuracy vs inf compared to the gunner of a halftrack. So aren't these comments about modern rifles a bit irrelevant. Are there any halftracks in use in modern armies?

Now I remember... he's one of the regional newsreaders at the Beeb these days.

It is not easy to kill inf at 300m+ range. Could there be some calculation re HT's that make the gunner more vulnerable if they are regularly getting KIA at 300m-500m range - a range that should be relatively safe for an inf man?

Very useful summary of IED operations, MOS. Finally I understand how they work. Thank you.

Who is "Rab C Nesbett"?

I am pretty happy as well. But, I could be happier...

While am sure that we can all agree with the preceding statements, the relativity of the discussion is quite simple and yet complex. While the explicit comments are unassailable in the relative sense it can be argued in the reverse directions as well. This may help:

"The British Army for the CMBS setting is very different to the British Army of the CMBS setting..." That clears thing up a lot. Re: mine-clearing. That seems to be a different game requiring much more time. In the game some designers mark minefield "areas" so the player has a chance of having a "Mark Mines" objective if desired. IED's are such a nasty surprise - but that seems like RL. The problem is that it makes for a horrible game experience to have a squad and/or valuable vehicle KO'd when in RL one would stop the op and deal with the mess. Having to stop and replay the mission kinda ruins the whole point.

I think we are in agreement: In the game, there should be greater movement/fatigue penalties for "overloading" squads.

Am in UK right now and have to say, I canna understand some of the regional (or immigrant) accents. They need subtitles. It's rare to hear what used to be called "the Queen's English". (It's the same in the US. Some southern and urban ghetto accents are incomprehensible.)

"One kill was at 4200 meters--way past the official range of 2200 meters." It occurred to me why they would even attempt to fire at that distance. Wonder if it was actually a test of some kind.

In the game, have often acquired an extra 1000 rounds plus all the AT a squad can carry. Playing a game like that right now. The squads seem to move QUICK or FAST just fine and do not tire as fast as I would have expected. Have always thought that a greater penalty should apply.

"c ) having at least maybe landed/crashed helicopter/aircraft available in the editor for designers to program scenarios around would be a nice in between approach." +1 Would be lovely eye candy. But as others have said, having actual aircraft actually seen to be flying around or landing is just not what CM is about. The current abstraction works well. "...many of us will line a battalion of Pershings and Tigers, grab some popcorn and hit the red button." Err... Maybe a few... Again seems like you want a different sort of game. Have you tried FPS's?

Haven't seen this mentioned in a while. So here goes: Hope that the next version gives us the ability to alter the UI size. On a 30" 2760 x 1600 monitor I have to resize the game to 1920x1200 or lower just to read the text. Soon UHD/4K monitors will become more widely used. Shame to have to degrade the image just to read.

(WEGO - ELITE) The varied mix of Brit light vehicles is wonderful (Sultans, Scimitars, Jackals, WMIK's etc). It's good to have another (sorta) Combined Arms mission after all the inf-heavy ones. Another feature that is good re Dragonwynn's designs is giving generous time to accomplish objectives. So, no forced unsafe mad dashes. One can focus on minimizing friendly losses. Xnt. ******** SPOILERS ********* The set-up zone extends across the entire friendly map edge. However, all at start units are set up on the right and center roads. Reinforcements are shown to enter the LHS road. However, the RHS road looks too easy for the enemy to ambush. So changed the default set-up so as to attack up the left and center roads, leaving the right road completely alone. Can swing towards the right hand side objectives after the left and center objectives are secured. Didn't see the point of sending the Jackal recon vehicles up the roads at night. So, dismounted all recon vehicles and sent em in on foot with 50m arcs. Used the Scimitar recon light armor as back-up along with the vehicle mounted AGL's and MG's (both of which are also dismountable and can be used as foot units!). Used some of the copious Brit 2IC and Support units to man the Jackals - so their 50cal's are also usable in support of the recon units. The plan worked well as the Brits are well-equipped with night vision. Enemy was easily spotted in trenches. The Scimitars only have 39x30mm HE shells(!) and 169x30mm AP shells which is the wrong way around for this kind of combat. (Maybe should have had a different load-out in the editor?) So, whenever possible am saving the Scimitar HE ammo and using the many FO's to kill enemy with 81mm (2 min to FFE). Have used the larger offmap HE (6-8 min to FFE) to lightly target the towns with area fire simply to keep the enemy heads down - but without doing much damage since that (again) is a big no no in terms of ROE. 30 minutes into this 2.5 hour mission: Have used engineers to breach walls of the first 3 town objectives on the left and center. Company B (the reinforcement) will take the left towns and work to the right. Company B is taking the center towns and will work over to take the right hand towns. HE has done most of the killing - with one Scimitar only providing useful fire for ~20 seconds (used 8 of its 39 HE shells!). Inf has been good at taking out enemy on roofs and in buildings. Generally, I don't prep fire much as I always worry about Brit lack of ammo resupply. And I intend to only use the total of 24 eng charges to breach walls - avoiding using em to enter buildings when doors are available. Seemed to have killed many Taliban with maybe 4-5 friendly inf losses so far.

Re my feedback for Mission 5. I was really enjoying that one and it was a shock to have it abruptly end with a draw. Not sure why. I figured the game would continue until the objectives were accomplished and only then would I get marked down for (perhaps) destroying too many buildings. There is so much airpower and arty available in Mission 5. Not sure what to use em on other than specific building targets when ID'd as full of enemy. I suppose one doesn't have to use much of the available support HE. But, maybe the Mission 5 victory conditions could do with a tweak. Mission 6 could have had similar issues as Mission 4. However, am finding Mission 6 much more fun. Possibly cos the Brit force is wonderful with all the Scimitars, Jackals and GP Rovers with dismountable 7.62mm MG's and Automatic Grenade Launchers. Lovely. So, perhaps Mission 4 was less interesting (for me) cos the inf unit mix was not diverse. Also, perhaps the objectives could have been different in some way. As it was, it seemed like I was doing exactly the same MOUT tactic over and over (and over) again.

Ditto here. Altho' I always wonder what is a RL loadout? In RL do squads take an extra 1000 rounds plus all the AT weapons they can carry? My sense is that troops weighed down with so much extra weapons and ammo do not suffer sufficient movement penalties in the game (in any CM2 title).

I may be old "riff". But, I take offense at the "raff" part (I think)!