M1A1TC
-
Posts
1,631 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by M1A1TC
-
-
Steve
What vehicles are you planning on including for US side? Will M113 Gavin, M1A1/M1M2 Abrams, M2A3/M3A3 Bradley, M998/M1097 Avenger, M109A6 Paladin, M270 MLRS, M9 ACE be available?
Are you including any FCS stuff at all?
Will you include other branches besides US Army?
[ November 09, 2005, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]
-
Don't be ridiculous, you can't do a search on everything before posting - only poeple who live on this forum ever suggest such nonsense. A polite comment that this has been recently discussed - possibly with a note about the outcome - is the appropriate way to deal with this IMO. </font>Originally posted by Bruce70:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:
Why dont people search before posting? Just on page 2 this was discussed already under "Website"
SEARCH BEFORE POSTING PLEASE
-
I dont think they will be including all these M16 versions- it's pointless waste of time
-
I already asked for formations and SOPs, and Steve posted that it is too hard to do. Read about it under "CMx2's new movement system explained " thread. I was dissapointed to hear that very much.
Here is it again:
"Because it is a ton of work, that's why Yes, in theory we can do formations and the AI that goes with it, but man oh man oh man is it a lot of work. If we had to only do ONE formation for ONE type of vehicle in ONE type of situation... no problemo. But that's not the way things are.
One of the fundamental problems with doing this sort of AI work. First, we have to define what a formation is and what SOPs go along for each vehicle within the formation. Nex we have to define positions within a specific type of formation, what is expected of each position, what it should do in the event it can't keep in formation, how it should react to different types of threats in order to remain consistent with the formation, and probably other things like this. Then w Then we have to create a decision matrix for a simulated Platoon Leader so that he chooses the correct formation for the setting. And to do that the simulated Platoon Leader needs to know what all the possible settings are and how good, or bad, a particular formation is for each one. That, of course, means programming all possible formations and their parameters. Then we have to move along and do the same thing for Company level since the parameters are not inherently the same. Nor are the formations. Then we have to do this for every other type of unit, then do entirely different matrix so that the chosen formations and parameters can be influenced by what formations and parameters units that it is working with are using.
It's a big, stinking mess of AI work. Yes, the FMs and TMs make a lot of this work much, much easier... but it still means a lot of coding work. All the FMs and TMs do is make it more likely that the end result of all that work has a decent chance of generally working as intended.
We'd like to do formations, and I think we will someday, but it certainly will not be in CM:SF. I doubt it will even be in CM's second release."
-
I am deploying in about 2 months, so I am hoping to get ACUs as well
-
Here is a pic that shows how long the standard M16 is
-
Why dont people search before posting? Just on page 2 this was discussed already under "Website"
SEARCH BEFORE POSTING PLEASE
-
Linky?Originally posted by fytinghellfish:Oh, BTW - the XM8 was just cancelled. Permanantly, it looks like.
As far as I know, its just suspended
http://www2.eps.gov/spg/USA/USAMC/DAAE30/W15QKN%2D05%2DX%2D0427/SynopsisR.html
http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=636
[ November 08, 2005, 07:22 AM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]
-
Steve, you are 100% correct.
-
Those must be the new M60E3. They are decent, though I prefer a SAW or M240 B
XM8 used as MG
[ November 08, 2005, 07:04 AM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]
-
The M4 and M16 are planned to be replaced by the XM8 currently in combat testing in next few years. This modular weapon will also replace M203 and the SAW
The 50Cal M2 MG will be replaced by M312 .50-Caliber (12.7mm) Machine Gun
[ November 08, 2005, 06:56 AM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]
-
The information is shared by a network.Most current vehicles such as Abrams and Bradleys have integrated network, where all friendlies appear as symbols, with their location updated by each vehicle's commander. Enemy symbols can be shared as well.
For example, on a Avenger system, I can see all aircraft around me for quite few miles. I can also put it locations of buildings,trees, whatever I want to use as TRP's. This info is shared among my battery, for example. So I know where each of my guys is positioned
-
Thats a Commander's Digital Assistant, or CDA. I hope the leaders in CM:SF use the latest Windows upgradeOriginally posted by Dillweed:Well i'm excited, but thats nothing new. I'm intrested in panel 4. Seems pretty self explanitory. Wonder what that PDA like thing is, or the dark shape to its left...
BTW, Steve, that looks great. I really like the layout. But how is the camera controlled? And I agree, can you put the weapons on a black backgound?
I think that picture is Pocket Sized Forward Entry Device (PSFED)
BTW, I dont think SGT Johnston would be using PSFED. I think these are used by Lts and above, not some buck-sergeant
[ November 07, 2005, 06:44 PM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]
-
I know about that, but since then they served other troops. Some Army National units still dont have body armor, and use flak jackets
-
Thanks, you are the best
You are talking about Kevlar shorts, right?
-
Flak jackets protect against flying shrapnell, wood and metal splinters. It has nothing to do with being on a bomber crew
Troops only recently started wearing bulletproof armor
-
My granma still lives in Volgograd, Ive been there several times, seen both the Mamaev Kurgan, the Traktorskiy Zavod (Factory), the Pavlov's house, and other monuments. There is also a need panoramic set up in a WW2 museum.
She was a nurse during the battle for Stalingrad, and saw capture of Paulus
BTW, Volgograd has the largest river port in Europe
-
Here you go
-
Here is a scan I just did to show what I am talking about:
Gunner's scanning for targets is realistic and I was sad not to see it in CM games
-
Ok, say a platoon of tanks in a wedge formation is moving across the desert. Each one is assigned a fire sector, which is the same regardless. The gunner of the lead tank, for example, scans from about 10 o'clock position relative to the hull to 2 o'clock position. The rest are scanning in their own sectors and avoid firing if friendly unit is infront. Why this can not be modeled?
Say you have a staggered column, then the last tank scans to the rear for targets automatically. The second tank scans left, third scans to the right. If the enemy is detected to the right, for example, each tank turns to the right, gets on-line, and gunners scan 10-2 o'clock.
Will the units in the game be able to tell what formation the platoon is in?
If you need help, I have Tank Platoon SOP, Tank Gunnery TMs, Sight Picture Training M1 Tank, etc
[ November 05, 2005, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]
-
Sure, no prob. Here are couple more
-
Here you go, from official ARMY TIMES magazine
IBA armor
Most soldier tend not to wear the groin protector, as it does get in the way
[ November 05, 2005, 03:50 PM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]
-
Will you be adding the Kevlar shorts?
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_Kevlar,,00.html
-
I know everyone sees CM games as whatever they want. Who cares as long as you have fun
Official Website?
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
I was just kidding. Dont take me too seriously