General Jack Ripper

Hello, I'm about to start the campaign, thanks for all the advice!

WOOHOO!!! I'm going to go buy British Forces right now... Okay that's done, now I'm going to fight the Battle of Bunker Hill all over again! The American Revolution: Revisited!!

From Wikipedia "Upon cancellation in 2004, it was split into three related programs. OICW Increment One is a program to develop a family of light kinetic energy weapons, OICW Increment Two is a program to develop the airburst grenade launcher as a standalone component, and OICW Increment Three will be a program to re-integrate the two components. The XM8 was developed in an attempt to meet Increment One requirements. Instead a new program known as Lightweight Small Arms Technologies (LSAT) was begun. Meanwhile, the XM25 25x40mm airburst launcher began development to meet the Increment Two requirements. Increment Three will not be initiated until after One and Two are completed." Beating a dead horse to make a useless weapon, IMO. What grunt in his right mind is going to want to lug this around along with the rest of his gear? Hitting a difficult target is why the Marines put an ACOG on every single rifle, correct?

Unless the team you are getting ammo for is an MG team, then all you need is 5.56mm.

The MTVR works fine as an ammo truck. I even set up a drill where I detach the anti-tank team from the squad, load them up with ammo, and send them back to the squad to pass it out. One thing that would be nice however, is the ability to 'aquire' ammo when deploying troops in the editor.

DOUBLE KILL! Achievement Unlocked: Buy 1 get 1 free.

I sympathize with this bit, I have routinely risked tanks and other vehicles, and soldiers to rescue bailed out crew from dangerous situations. My feeling is 'leave no man behind'. If I take casualties, but the bailed out crew gets to safety, I consider the cost worth it.

Here is the way I see it. In the editor, you are given the option to rename your squads. I tend to name the squads after friends of mine. When I am out fighting the enemy, every time I hear someone yell out they have been hit, I zoom in to check their status. I tend to beat myself up over any stupid mistakes that lead to the squad leader getting hit. The game becomes very personal sometimes, as I feel that even though we have become seperated in real life, my friends are fighting beside me when I play. We used to play wargames all the time back home, so I see it as carrying on a tradition. One time I made a big mistake. I was assaulting a building and two squads were killed by a bunch of Syrians who had been hiding on the upper floors. I had thought the building was empty, so I moved quick to get my squads in a position upstairs to cover some advancing troops. The Syrians opened fire, and within the 60 second turn, all but 2 men were killed/wounded. That really upset me, but I used that feeling to make sure I always double-check to make sure a building is empty before rushing inside. I guess I take things too seriously sometimes. I even made up a notebook keeping track of my friends unit performance and stats from game to game. I post it on my blog so my buddies can check it out. I have always prefered 1:1 simulation, going back to the Close Comabat series. I think it helps the all important immersion factor that I find essential in wargames. However, I guess if it gets to the point where you actually cry a bit when things go terribly wrong, you need to relax a bit. I am a very strange person I guess.

Hey, if people like the one who made that video were ever correct in their predictions, we would be living on the moon and driving spaceships to work. And there would be cool robots, and laserguns.

Try the proeffects tracer mod here at the Repository.

As I understand it: YES!! Soldier animations apply to all soldiers regardless of affiliation.

That new Hunt animation is perfect! One of my nitpicks has been destroyed!

I'll see your list Sequoia and raise you one: Thunderstorms incorporating relative lighting and sound, with appropriate benefits/penalties to visual, and sound spotting. It's so dry in Syria I get dehydrated when I play CMSF for too long. I really miss rain and snow...

For the most part, as long as you are not wearing excessive gear, that little 6mm 200-400fps pellet will tell you when you get hit. Also, outdoor ranges use biodegradeable pellets, cant be littering the countryside with plastic now can we? I used to play paintball, but the combination of airsoft guns looking like the real thing, and the fact that you don't need to wash paint out of your gear sold me on airsoft.

As long as the 'Hunt' animation is changed to where the pixeltroops actually have their weapon up and ready to shoot, I'm golden. Also, the wall jumping animation looks awesome!

That was really cool. Reminds me of the good old days, playing in the woods behind my house. My mom always thought there was something wrong with me. Started out with sticks, then moved up to paintball, and then airsoft. I still have my old airsoft M-14, and my gear in my closet.

OK Thanks.

Greetings to all you Stryker people, and everyone else. I have a question I would like to submit for your consideration: Given that infantrymen are operating in close with the Stryker, would the application of ERA prove a hazard to the Infantry near the vehicle? For example: Infantry are deploying from their Stryker when the vehicle is hit, the ERA activates, and explodes to neutralize the incoming round. Would the infantrymen deploying from the vehicle be in danger from a blast effect, or fragments? I had read on FAS.org about the BMP-3: "A French SNPE ERA kit and others are available for use on the BMP-3. However, during dismounted troop movement ERA would be a hazard. Thus, passive armor is more likely and ERA application is doubtful." Would this statement also apply to the Stryker?

True enough, I love building a defensive line, giving the AI loads of troops, and seeing if it can push me out of my position.

I hadn't encountered that problem, I simply used 'Heavy' 'Area Target' for all of my CAS requests, and the aircraft used whatever weapons were appropriate for the target. Hellfires and mavericks on tanks, rockets on light vehicles and infantry, and gun runs on everything when they ran out of heavy stuff. I'm pretty sure your aircraft will use some type of ordinance when you ask it to attack, unless it's a point target on a specific unit, then they might not attack if they have no weapons capable of destroying the target you selected. For example: Aircraft might not want to drop a bomb on a fast moving vehicle, they probably wouldn't be able to hit the target.

I was playing Hold the Line a few days ago, and to be honest after 45 minutes of constant Apache and A-10 attacks there was only 2 instances of air strikes going awry. I used area targets on average about 150m in front of my positions, and while some attacks came very close to my trenches, only two Hydra runs by apaches actually hit my own positions, causing a few casualties. (Good thing I had my squads split into teams and spread out!) For the most part, the CAS came in on target, and was very precise. The Hydras do have a good size spread, but they used rockets mainly against infantry and light vehicles, so only a couple rockets had to hit the target to knock it out. Anyway, I guess that's not entirely on topic, but that was a really fun fight those Apache drivers really earned their pay on that scenario. I also learned to stagger the CAS request so there will always be a couple Apaches doing runs without any wait time. I think I'll go play that again now... (/StrangeRanting)

That game looks a bit like Company of Heroes, need I say more?

MMM... Ground Pressure. The size and length of the tracks is also a significant portion of cross country mobility.

Aside from the Humvee Gunner issue, there really is only one thing I would like to see, and I already know I won't: Rocket Artillery Otherwise everything's solid enough.

I'm sorry sir, but I must disagree with your statement. The testing that I ran for my scenario included entrenched enemies at 300-200 Meters ambushing a CAAT Platoon. (This to determine Humvee effectiveness in general) Even though the enemy was 300 meters away, the Humvee gunners buttoned up like scared rabbits, and the crew in the humvees simply watched in fascination as the un-suppressed enemy lobbed RPG's at them until the humvees and crew were dead. From what I have discoved in further testing, the Humvees in CMSF are simply not effective in combat at all. It is a vary rare example where the gunner stays with his gun for even a few seconds of incoming fire, even though there is a nice big gun shield for him to hide behind. It is almost as if the gun shield isn't recognized by the game, so the gunner thinks he's unprotected. If that were the case however, gunners still button up far too early for my tastes, even when the vehicle is hull down, or on a ridge and the enemy is slightly below, gunners are like rabbits.