Erwin

Have been playing ARMA for a week or so, and you CAN run over and kill infantry (both sides), the graphics are superior to CM2, things can catch on fire, there is blood, you can knock down trees, you can talk with NPC's, there are aircraft etc etc... However, the gameplay is still superficial compared to to any CM game. And I am already fed up with ARMA after playing maybe three missions of the campaign. The bottom line is that all those graphics get boring real fast if you don't have decent/fairly realistic gameplay.

The later ones I mentioned are more entertaining campaigns.

Am about 1 hr 30 mins into this scenario and still enjoying it immensely. Have dealt with all the enemy on the left edge and have reached the treeline that goes all the way to the left edge. Trying to catch up now with the forces in the center and right who are encountering more enemy in sunken tree lines. I did CF to gauge progress and so far have lost 8 guys WIA and 2 KIA. (4 ANA, one crew and 3 Brit troopers, plus one AFV immobilized by a grenade cos it got too close to the action... I thought I was mopping up a last shell-shocked Taliban only to find at 3+ enemy eager to fight to the last man. This is where I lost my 3 Brit troopers as well!) A few observations and questions: ****POSSIBLE SPOILERS**** I find the ARTY suprisingly ineffective. I hit the same spot or building sometimes 3 times with 81mm, 105mm and medium chopper fire, and there are still enemy units who pop up ready to fight (per losing 3 Brits and an AFV as described above). I assumed there would be more 81mm mortar ammo than 105mm. However, I find I am almost out of 81mm with maybe half the 105mm still available. This is probably due to hitting a tree area or spot with mortars once or twice, finding it ineffective and then moving on to using 105mm and aircraft. The briefing paragraphs could be split up a bit. The paras are so dense I missed the chopper reinforcement sentence. As a result, I have been way too economical in my chopper usage thinking I had to make 2 choppers last for the whole scenario. As for shopper and aircraft usage, I find they often don't seem to attack at all. I hear something like "Cleared for positive control... Clear off..." What does that mean?? Many times the attack winow says they are attacking or "coming around" as if they already attacked, but there is no attack (that I can see). I know this is supposed to simulate a RL operation, and it is fun. However, as a hint to other designers it would be even more "fun" to have ANA AFV's and vehicles as well as more of the plethora of Brit AFV's and their other soft-skinned vehicles. I miss not having tanks or even AFV's with more than a 12.7mm.

Just to be sure, this the 3rd upload of this, or have the later ones (on this forum page) been improved?

If this is the same as the CMMODS upload it's a very welcome addition. Thanks...

Great, thanks...

Didn't you play "Cowboys and Indians" when you were a pup? That era caused "unimagineably horrible suffering" to the native americans. Should we ban kids from playing it? Of course we don't yet have CM: DEATH CAMP, where the Germans have to eliminate as many Jews, Poles, Gypsies, Homos, Commies and everyone else they hated, before the Allies can reach the camp and liberate it. So, there is a line somewhere...

If these are the ones you uploaded to CMMODS I have em in my Z and they are wonderful.

The most important aspect is "content" and gameplay value. There were literally dozens, maybe hundreds of great-looking games in the last 10-15 years that only lasted a few weeks on my computer due to playability and content issues - eg: ARMA 2 is on its way out for me right now. Many of us are still CM1 fans and if we had CM2 game engine and gameplay sophistication in CM1 we would still be happy playing a well-modded CM1 - even though a well-modded CM2 gamehas superior graphics. With a small company like BF that has to make choices re where to invest time and money, improving the game engine/playability, (improving the confusing LOS and C2 aspects etc.) should be the first, second and third priorities... way ahead of graphics.

Looking forward to using these. Thanks...

+1 (and many other CM1 features that were great and are missed, and are slowly getting put back in thank goodness.)

Very welcome. Thank you.

"Something i really did like in campaigns was the ability to make off-map decisions." "My biggest turn-off is having to read six or eight pages of operational history before I even get to the scenario." +1 to both.

The biggest issue with identifying with units re their "backstory" is that most CM2 designers let all the units be default identical (other than their names). Flavor would be even more enhanced if the units had significant differences in their characteristics/bonuses etc. Then one would better care about a particular officer etc.

Try "Competant Incompetance" and "Salang Blues". They have an interesting mix of units and situations.

+1 to "do something about the set-up and covered arc colors."

+1 re campaign briefings issues. IIRC players don't get to see the campaign briefing after a scenario starts, so designers, plz be sure to include important info in each scenario briefing. eg: Replacements, ammo resupply levels, arty availability and resupply between scenarios etc.

1. How important is the strategic map image? While it's nice to see a historical context, it doesn't aid gameplay of the scenario at all, so not important. For those who want a historical context, the designer could simply add some links to articles for example. That way, those who what to, can read/research all they want without the designer having to use his valuable game design time writing a historical summary. 2. How important is the operational map image? Same remarks as for 1). 3. For the tactical map, do you prefer a 2D style or a 3D in-game screen-shot type? Much prefer a 2D map with objectives and VP's clearly marked. "Assault Arrows" or instructions as to how to proceed should be limited if any at all, as that should be entirely up to the player. 4. For the briefing text, what are turn-offs? Like perhaps too much wordiness or trying to tell you what to do? An overall brief instruction of "today's objectives" is all that is needed. I really dislike detailed instructions as to what to do, or how to do it. That feels like someone else is playing the game, and I am merely implementing other people's instructions. If the scenario doesn't work if one doesn't do what one is told to do, then that is a problem with the scenario. (The exception is when it's a "training scenario" designed to teach a specific lesson.) 5. What about the image you see as you first scroll through the scenarios? Is that important to set the mood or just indicate what side you might be fighting on? The image of the number of soldiers is helpful in selecting what size of scenario I want to play, but any other image is ignored. Additional items: A) Some designers make the reinforcement schedule confusing with long lists of units in military jargon that is really a waste of precious design time in game terms . All we need to know to play your scenario is a) the basic reinforcements and arrival schedule as in "A formation of X Panthers will arrive in approx Y minutes". If desired, company or battalion designations could be left to an index at the end so players are not forced to read through tons of jargon to figure out what is going to be happening. Have also seen scenario briefings which decribe in excruciating detail the "personalities" of officers in the scenario as if this was a role-playing game. This is also a waste of time, irrelevant and confusing. We can see the officer attributes ourselves and make our own conclusions re their "personality" if we want. C) Please make your units as individualistic as possible. Nearly all CM2 scenarios seem to have HQ's and units with exactly the same attributes and ammo loads. This is a big backwards step from CM1 in which HQ and other units were often quite different from each other and this gave them "personality" and improved players' immersion in your scenario. As in RL, not everyone is the same. Randomness, uniqueness is great for improving verisimilitude and game immersion. Wish list: I wish that the game allowed for a brief paragraph description, plus perhaps the briefing map when one first clicks on a scenario so one can decide if one wants to play it BEFORE one spends a minute or so loading it and only then reading the full briefing. A way to increase size of text and UI for those with high def monitors would be very helpful. (Of course I guess that is not up to the designers.) Great questions btw. Hope this helps.

Half an hour into it and really enjoying the challenge. It's nice to have enuff time and support to do things "right". Looking forward to more scenarios and campaigns from you.

Wow. Congrats to you guys!

Dammit, that completely ruins CMSF for me! I KNEW there was something wrong with the French units!

It can be very tricky. Gernan mortars (at least) have a Section HQ and a Platoon HQ. I thought that if you leave the Section HQ with the mortars that you could send the Platoon HQ anywhere to spot. Sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn't. Then I found if I have (any) vehicle near the mortars with a radio that seems to help make the system work. But, imo the whole C2 issue is way too complex and virtually incomprehensible cos there are so many "if's ands and buts" re exceptions to the rule. I really hope this is one day streamlined so that one can focus on the fun aspects of the game - tactics, rather than game system mechanics. Ditto with the non-intuitive LOS system which has frustrated players ever since CM2 came out.

If the "Fire Briefly" command doesn't work for any weapon, the only other tactic is to move the weapon after "x" seconds. Yes, it takes time to set-up again, but it saves ammo.

It's a great shame that CMSF isn't more flexible in terms of creating scenarios from the world's news. If it featured French units, we could be playing the Mali situation. Also, the terrain is limited, so it's hard/impossible to create other realistic environments. These features wouold make CMSF much more relevant and current (although admittedly Syria is pretty current). However, wold be great to simulate other ME conflicts with other nations.

These good great. Just to confirm. If we have downloaded the two newer updated files, we don't need this one?