DaveWilson

"It already is. The troops in TacOps are experienced, have good morale, have good training, are not exhausted, and have adequate small unit leadership." Never mind. Carry on...

1)I would like to see the effectiveness of the troops be based on Moral, Training, Experience, Fatigue and Leadership.

I'm no expert but I'd think the ballistics would be about the same as the M2. OTOH the accuracy would be MUCH greater due to the bi-pod rest, telescopic sights and training of the user. As I understand it, the .50 rifle is not intended for use as an anti-personal weapon but to take out 'soft' targets like Radar Facilities, ammo and fuel dumps as well as aircraft and helicopters on the ground. Good luck with the new addition.

I think it would be a nice feature if onboard enemy artillery and mortar counters would reveal themselves if a Firefinder Radar was in range to detect their incoming rounds. I don’t know how difficult this would be to code but all the pieces are in place to add this additional realism and give actual functionality to and existing unit that now has none. [ July 10, 2003, 12:54 PM: Message edited by: DaveWilson ]

When playing solo is OPFOR limited by supplies? Do they run out over time as mine do? If so, if I were to use the Logistics Package would OPFOR be forced to do the same? Thanks in advance. [ July 08, 2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: DaveWilson ]

I like 'Marks' as well but I really wish the small maps would resize to 'full screen'. An option like this would make things so much easier for those of us over 50

If the Iraqi's had any of these left (ZSU-23-4) they could be quite effective against any Helicopter in the daytime if they kept their radar off and were in good cover. I'm not saying they could hide forever or escape destruction if discovered. But they could send a lot of lead downrange very quickly. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/zsu-23-4.htm [ April 29, 2003, 04:33 PM: Message edited by: DaveWilson ]

Congratulations to MajorH..! Now, a question. Is this new product going to stop development on the 'Civilian' version of TacOps... :confused: [ March 07, 2003, 08:23 PM: Message edited by: DaveWilson ]

"Anyone knows how to open these things without damaging them ?" Rap it sharply on the nose with a hammer. The shell will then automaticlly 'disassemble'.

I’m not here to ‘bad mouth’ TacOps or to say that it’s not worth the money. I played the demo first and it was an accurate representation of the final product. No one tried to fool me. I’m just saying the program did not ‘exceed’ my expectations. I started playing board wargames 40 years ago and the computer variety in 1980 on my brand new Apple II with 48K of memory I’m not an expert; just an experienced customer. I think what I find most disappointing is the lack of ‘character’ in the troops. The units don’t have individual Experience, Training, Fatigue or Moral factors. It’s almost if they were Robots. If the above were include you could have a vast array of different types of troops from Delta Force to Militias. I remember simulations where your troops would gain experience with each battle. I always thought that was a nice feature. You also had to spend ‘money’ to repair or replace lost equipment. The second major problem is Command & Control. There are no Headquarters units that effect play in a positive or negative way. I don’t find this realistic. Smaller problems are the Unit Box coming up over the Unit Icon. It should not be too difficult to have it place somewhere else on the screen. There’s plenty of room. Finally (you knew this was coming) where did Opfor get the ‘Death Ray’ that keeps killing my M1A1’s with headon shots? OTOH there are may features that I do like, so like I said, TacOps is not ‘Bad’, it just that it could be much better.