Ant

Sorry but you're wrong. Smoke was most definitely used to mark targets in WW2. It was further refined during Korea with specific FAC aircraft. By the time of Vietnam using smoke to mark targets was an old and very well established technique. Later in war, FAC located in leading elements with radio equipment to talk directly to cab rank. -targets marked by arty or mortars using coloured smoke or phosphorous. From: http://www.stratnet.ucalgary.ca/courses/hist349/lecture7.html

The only thing that initially cried out to me as needing modded is the helmets for British armoured inf. they've got that funny shape to them which I assume represents the standard British tin helmet with a cammo cover. They'd look good with some foliage or scrim on them but currently the plain look just seems a bit odd to me. I investigated adding some of Andrew Fox's fine mods from CMBO but the BMPs for CMBO seem to be only half the size of the CMAK ones.

Was this really a valid tactic? Seems to me that if you could scare tanks away by firing MGs at them then tanks would be a bit useless :confused: Also why didn't the tank just start chucking HE at the MG position instead of running away?

I've got to admit that I really like the idea of a patch that we could pay for and d/l to expand CMAK into CMBO territory but from BFCs perspective that would just mean spending yet more time working on old CM instead of the new game engine, and from what I understand they're pretty keen to get on with the new game. Maybe if we just sit patiently playing CMAK for a couple of years we get some sparkling new Cromwells in CMX2

Well according to BFC they didn't want to put vehicles in to CMAK that weren't used in NA/Italy because they might stand accused of producing a game that was not entirely historically accurate. I can understand some people wanting to recreate those good old CMBO battles but, speaking as somebody who has been playing the full version for a few days, CMAK has lots to offer on it's own merits. I'm having so much fun in NA and Italy that I'm not really bothered about old CMBO battles.

Yeah, you're right. I've got no problem being wrong I just get a bit annoyed when I'm misquoted. All I'm trying to do is figure out if I'm just unlucky or if FF really was that bad. Maybe a bit of both. It's moot anyway bacause I can't see it being changed before CMX2 and I think a lot more knowledgeable people than me will have some say on how CAS is implemented in that. Thanks Michael.

You really can't read properly can you? or are you just too thick to understand posts that don't involve reams of statistics? I've repeatedly stated that I'm talking about my experiences of CM as a whole including CMBO CMBB and CMAK, not just two incidences. Now should I repeat that in block capitals or should I draw you a picture so that you can understand? If you're having problems with big words please let me know. I've also said (if you can't take in two paragraphs at once please lie down before you attempt this second bit) that I base the 50% on my own personnal experiences and that it's not scientific just my impression. I am allowed to give general impressions whilst talking about this game am I? Or do I need to produce half a dozen web-links to back up every word? and do I have to perform a statistical study every time I play a scenario? Really? Guess that illiteracy thing must be real hard to live with eh? If you bother to strain yourself and try to read the posts in this topic you'll see that Michael Emrys agreed with me about the 50% figure. He also says that it's not a scientifically arrived figure but just from rough experience.....as I have done. So we're either unlucky or our perceptions are wrong. Fine, I'm OK with that, Michael might be OK with that too. The only person who seems to have a problem is you. But then as you seem to have such difficulty with the basics such as reading and comprehension your opinion matters not one jot really.

OK. Let's start again because I'm really not interested in a pissing contest. I'm not screaming 'BFC fix or do sumfink' or attempting to scientifically prove that CM gets it wrong, or coming here saying it should be changed. I'm merely pointing out my experiences with CAS in CM and why I don't think it seems realistic to me, and in the process perhaps illicit other people's experiences to find out what they are seeing and to find out if my experiences are typical or just a blip. You said that you've played that scenario seven times, and each time the P51 targets the enemy.....fine, if that's what people are generally finding then I accept that I'm just unlucky. If you produced a document showing me that FF rates were indeed 50% then I'd say "Well blow me down I never would have believed it but I guess it's true" WARNING POSSIBLE SPOILER++++++++++++++++ + + + + + + + + + + I've only played that scenario twice. The first time as the US forces and flyboy took out two of my armoured vehicles with a rocket strike. The second time as the Germans......and flyboy took out my Tiger with a rocket strike. Now of course that's not sufficient spread of data to build a firm scientific conclusion but you can't deny that it's bloody annoying, not to mention the fact that a green pilot now has a 100% strike ratio with rockets. If it was just that one scenario on those two occasions then it would be down to terrible luck, but I seem to experience that sort of thing regularly in CM. I just want to know if I'm a jinx and my experiences are atypical or if there is any evidence to show that FF rates were as high as I seem to be experiencing.

Ah, yes. I just checked. the longer barreled M3 without firing ports are the later versions. The early ones look like your screenshot. Thanks. I was just wondering if CDV had slipped in earlier BMPs to their version.

OK. Hard facts. Fact 1. Real life CAS missions were regularly requested and flown. Fact 2. I seem to be getting an average of 50% Friendly fire with CM CAS missions Fact 3. If real life CAS missions had a 50% Friendly fire rate then they wouldn't have been requested and flown Fact 4 See fact 1 </font>

Andreas You posted a screenshot of an M3 from the beta version of CMAK a wee while ago. It was different from the M3 in the demo as it had more detailed firing ports and, what looked like, a shorter 75mm gun. Yet the full release CDV version of the game looks the same as the demo. So what was the deal with the Beta M3? It actually looked better than the one we've currently got. Have CDV used older textures in their release again?

Yes. There is snow and blizzard conditions.

I was going to order it direct from BFC. But I had some mail order stuff go missing last week, and the fact that it's on the shop shelves now swayed me....so I got it yesterday. I've never had any problems with CDV and the waffengrenadier thing doesn't bother me. I'm enjoying playing it now

I spent most of last night playing CMAK I just love being able to play with British troops again, especially with all the early war tanks. Although the helmets for the British mechanised infantry troops look a bit funny.

OK. Hard facts. Fact 1. Real life CAS missions were regularly requested and flown. Fact 2. I seem to be getting an average of 50% Friendly fire with CM CAS missions Fact 3. If real life CAS missions had a 50% Friendly fire rate then they wouldn't have been requested and flown Fact 4 See fact 1 Please note that I'm not talking about one particular scenario here, I've got no problem with a 50% friendly fire probability in one particular scenario given the correct circumstances for such. I'm talking about CAS in general in CM. I'm talking about experiencing CAS through CMBO, CMBB and now CMAK. I have a tendancy, like Michael, to simply say that my personal experiences are too limited or that it's just me being unlucky......but there are an awful lot of CM players on this board that seem to be getting the same experiences with CAS that I'm getting. So I'm starting to think that it's not just me, it's the game. Of course it's too late to do anything about it in CM now; we'll have to wait for CMX2. I realise the subject of CAS has been discussed to death before but these discussions tend to get dominated by grogs who quote statistics from this document or personal experiences from that book or findings from some other study. These are very interesting in themselves but I tend to think we lose sight of the wood for the trees. I just thought that I'd inject a little basic common sense.

Sorry but I don't understand your reasoning. CMBB is set between 1941 and 1945 which means that if you play a lot of scenarios then you fall into your first statement. Even more evidence to suggest that if the air force didn't like doing CAS but were, nevertheless, getting requests for it from ground forces then those ground forces must have thought that CAS was worthwhile. EXACTLY. You have suggested that ground forces requested CAS even when the air force didn't want to do it. If those ground forces had the same experiences that we CM players have then there would be no requests for CAS because it would be a total lottery with as much chance of getting your own forces killed as the enemy. The fact that CAS missions were requested and flown suggests that the probability of friendly fire was less than we seem to get in CM......as I said about 50% in my experience.

I know that friendly fire happened. My problem is it's frequency in CM. Maybe I'm just unlucky but from my experiences in CM I've got about a 50/50 chance of friendly air support targetting my own units and I simply don't believe that throughout WW2 CAS missions had a 50% chance of taking out their own troops. If that were the case they simply wouldn't do any CAS missions at all because they'd be wasting time, effort and lives for no gain whatsoever.

Yes. I just sent an e-mail.

I read a very good article a few years ago about how to avoid 'recon by death' in the Talonsoft campaign games. It basically involved using the speed of a light recon vehicle to quickly get to observation points overlooking possible avenues of enemy advance and wait to see what they could see. This usually doesn't work so well in CM because the map sizes are typically too small. I think that in real life these vehicles would be working further ahead of the main forces, whereas in a typical CM scenario they're virtually chucked in to the main battle and so are usually less usefull

I read a very good article a few years ago about how to avoid 'recon by death' in the Talonsoft campaign games. It basically involved using the speed of a light recon vehicle to quickly get to observation points overlooking possible avenues of enemy advance and wait to see what they could see. This usually doesn't work so well in CM because the map sizes are typically too small. I think that in real life these vehicles would be working further ahead of the main forces, whereas in a typical CM scenario they're virtually chucked in to the main battle and so are usually less usefull

For some strange reason it's only the Americans. The British/commonwealth use the new style shoulder view too.

I got CMAK in Hemel Hempstead today.....and I've been playing it for the past 2 hours

And what the heck was the gun's HQ unit on the left doing, giving some fire support or just sitting watching the show :confused:

Me too I'm not entirely convinced it is. You can quote all the statistics and the studies you want at me but I don't need a degree in astrophysics to know the sun comes up in the morning, and from a purely common sense point of view if friendly fire was as prevalent in real life as it seems to be in CM then they just wouldn't bother doing CAS missions at all, because from my experience my own air support is as dangerous to me as it is to the enemy.

That's wrong. It's not available in the shops here in the UK yet!