Erwin

For those out there using a widescreen monitor... What is the ideal resolution to set your game to so your units have the correct dimensions?

"Just remember what you did..." This is the problem. I run dozens of mods simultaneously. It becomes a filing system issue to handle mods this way.

AFAIK you never have to go in and delete anything that is part of the original game. Folders/files in the Z folder automatically take precedence over original sounds or graphics. I think the system reads and uses those in a folder with a name that comes last in the alphabet... hence it's called a Z folder. Yes, it seems a lot more complex and takes more work than CM1. Only a programmer or someone with the mind of an accountant could love this new system of mods.

My question was when the mod maker did not create a folder but simply puts a bunch of files in a zip file. Is it advisable/ok to create a folder of whatever name one wants (does it matter what you name your own folders?) and put that folder in the z folder. Or can one simply put the grahics files into the z folder (that creates a bit of a mess as they get all mixed up with other mods that also don't have folders). It would be great if there were a standard way of "publishing" mods. Currently, so many mod makers do it "their own way" often without an instructions and it is very confusing.

The mods may come in a zip or rar folder. You need to "unzip" these and you will find usually a folder that contains either a .brz file or actual graphics files. Simply copy that folder into the Z folder under DATA. (Create a Z folder under DATA if one does not already exist.) I also create folders called something like CMSF MODS and CMSF SOUND MODS somewhere else and keep copies of all my mods in there as well. You may find that you want to try out mods and delete others and I find it's safer to keep a copy of ALL mods. What I don't understand is that sometimes one unzips a mod and one finds only graphics files - ie no folder. I am unsure if you simply copy those graphics files into the Z folder (messy) or if you are expected to create your own folder, put those graphics files in this new folder and then put the new folder in the Z folder. Like so many other things mod management is trickier and more complex than the good old CM1 days.

When the mod consists of .bmp files rather than a .brz folder, does one also simply put all the .bmp graphics files into the z folder. Or, should one create a new folder and put em in that and then put that new folder in the Z folder??

Thanks. (Is this vs AI or only H2H?)

I did tests in mission 2 after reading about the problems people were having and I indeed did get vehicles across safely on FAST. However, when I tried that later in the scenario, they would get blown up. So, something else may have been going on. Maybe when I successfully got units across on FAST the triggerman was moving, or hiding or...? Either way, in that situation, smoke is the way to go. Why I am uncomfortable about using that tactic in the scenario is that we are TOLD there is a IED on the bridge. Well, I am sure that if that were known, they would wait for engineers to disarm the thing. I find it VERY hard to believe that CO's would order their expensive vehicles and crews to play russian roulette by racing across such a bridge - whether using smoke or not.

No worries... There is a file in your CMSF root folder that you can edit to get the resolution that you want (unlike the CM1 series). Am not at my game computer currently, but I think its called something like "Preferences" Someone else is sure to tell you here.

Dave: I think you may be correct. AFAIK one loses far more points for failing to meet the enemy and friendly casualty objectives than for preserving buildings. I got a Total Victory in mission 2 (IED on the bridge) and a Draw in mission 3 (clearing the small urban area of triggermen). I often find myself less satisfied when I win a Total Victory as it's often undeserved imo - there still being some enemy able to put up a fight. (And I suspect I am a masochist.) Otherwise was quite satisfied with the Draw result in mission 3, but do feel that the way the game handles IED's (ie one cannot ID them before they kill you) is um... flawed. I do now suspect that the "Gamey Trick" to winning these types of missions is to: 1) Destroy all buildings with LOS to the IED locations (not always practicable). 2) Smoke the whole area so zero visibility. Then just march through the objectives, get the points and get out fast. I have noticed that designers get a bit defensive when you bitch about their work, so let me again reassure everyone again that I am having a great time playing the game, and enjoying all your work very much.

If you are treating CMSF as a "game" rather than an attempt at an accurate sim, your ideas are absolutely right, as the only issue should be player-enjoyment. (And I lean towards this POV.) However, to be a devil's advocate (and I am sure I will be corrected if wrong) chaos is the norm in RL war and you have to "go with what you got." So, a sim-enthusiast might argue that the frustrations you outline are part of what makes war a nasty business full of fiascos in which people do die unnecessarily.

Beautiful work LLF. Did you ever give an ETA for release, (or did I miss it?).

I have experimented with using both air and arty (up to 81mm anyhow) on LIGHT and PERSONNEL and I have found that using this munitions combo one can do many missions (a dozen or so) over urban areas which locate and take out enemy forces without losing points for damaging buildings. Worst case scenario you may damage some buildings slightly and get fewer points - and that point don't do any more such missions. However, one is almost always penalized far more for not meeting the scenario's friendly and enemy casualty objectives. One can also fire 25mm-30mm at a building USUALLY for up to a minute (sometimes more) without causing the sort of damage that will cost you points (your actual results may vary so do some testing).

If CM:N is "delayed" until June 7th, 2011 due to AI issues, is that acceptable? If CM:N is "delayed" until June 7th, 2011 due to marketing, is that acceptable? If CM:N is "delayed" until June 7th, 2011 due to TCP/IP WeGo, is that acceptable? If CM:N is "delayed" until June 7th, 2011 due to UNKNOWN issues, is that acceptable? Absolutely yes it is... if one has confidence that BFC will use the time to make the game better. Some of us still remember the godawful howling and whining when CMSF was first released "early" with bugs.

Paper Tiger: Seriously, is that what RL troops do? ie: They pour on a lot of smoke and then behave as if there are no IED's around cos they are sure that cos the triggerman can't SEE the IED location then they must be safe(???) That's what the game demands, so if you can back that up with RL examples then I will actually be very happy (for real). Oh and BTW PT, I am enjoying the scenario and campaign immensely, so am not bitching about the scenario actually... I am more frustrated by the CM2 limitations and the lack of clear explanations as to how things work or a manual that explains all the CM2 features and quirks that we seem to endlessly discuss in these forums so that we can play the game intelligently. Dave: Are you talking about Canadian mission 2 - the IED's on the only bridge to get to the town? There may be different AI plans, but I found at least one triggerman in the town outskirts but no one in the buildings close to the bridge. You have to be pretty observant to know you've killed a triggerman, and I guess there has to be a friendly unit almost standing over him to ID. If you kill and long range you may never know for sure.

Have you tried Canadian Campaign mission 3? That is close to what you described and very bloody. I suppose one could use a lot of smoke and then move freely since the triggermen couldn't see to detonate. I find myself continuously torn between trying to use RL tactics and realizing they can be disastrous in the game, and being frustrated at being forced to use gamey techniques to win missions.

1.31 also gives the Canadian engineers their satchel charges.

Let's forget about the PPHE vs HEDP issue as I think that is complicating the issue. Let's just focus on ammo sharing. AKD: "edit: Just tested and a GMG team will not share its final 32 rounds of HEDP. This is why the total HEDP shown available for sharing is not the actual total of all the HEDP carried by the teams. So sending an empty team to acquire ammo for the purposes of sharing would be pointless." Am confused as usual... I thought you showed that 2(+) teams would share ammo. So, if 2 teams were in proximity each with 32 rounds, both teams show 64 rounds and one of the teams could fire all 64 rounds(?). Also, did you show that the "Command element" (that's their HQ correct?) can carry 50 (or more?) rounds, and can give ALL of those rounds to a GPMG team. The proviso is that the HQ and sub unit remain in proximity till all 50 rounds are expended. ie: if the HQ unit moves away immediately before the GPMG unit fires, the GPMG unit will only have acquired 32 rounds. Presumably, if the GPMG unit fires 18 rounds and stops firing, it will grab the rest of the ammo from the HQ, so if the HQ moves away immediately after the 18 rounds are fired, the HQ will have 0 rounds.

Ok, time for a poll. Who amongst us actually studies the night sky in CMSF to check on star locations lol?

Well, if the IED's are mixed up with other flavor objects I suppose one can waste time and ammo shooting at all flavor objects. If they are near "bags" and bags are what id's an IED, then the game becomes more about looking for "bags." Not so much fun imo. Am starting to think that without mine/IED clearing ability, these features should not be in the game. It's ludicrous to think that in RL one would be ordered to go locate IED's, and the only way to find them is to be blown up. It's perfectly acceptable of course to have a "conventional" mission and to stumble across a deadly IED during that mission. But, to tell us there are IED's at a location and make that a part of the game when nothing can be done seems silly.

Do we at least know (in the akd example) if ammo is expended by any or all of the teams, then one team goes to get ammo resupply: 1) How many rounds can the "resupply team" get from the vehicle? 2) When it rejoins the other 2 teams (or gets within 24 meters) how many rounds are shared with the other teams (all or only a %, or..?)? Someone at BF, pleeze enlighten us...

Ach... snipers... don't get me started... <breathe deeply 10 times and repeat after me "This is just a game, this is just a game..."

c3k is doing something similar in another thread. This a such an important feature I really hope we can have definitive rules/explanation re how ammo sharing works from BF.

Ok, so you are saying that Det 5 acquired ammo (mysteriously) since it was moving away. And the other detachment never acquired any additional ammo(?) (I am just so confused about this - and a few other CMSF features as well...)

That is very interesting, but am still a bit confused. Did the Pioneers' 620 HEDP ever get exchanged/acquired? You are saying that the GMG running away (5 detach) received extra ammo?? The HQ was able to give extra HEDP ammo away??? ('Fraid I still don't understand what one needs to actually do to have one unit give ammo to another unit. Or, what the limitations are... Like all units have to be part of the same formation - is that platoon? In which case does that mean Company and above CO's can never give ammo to anyone?