stikkypixie
-
Posts
4,132 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by stikkypixie
-
-
In case any of BFC is reading, on page 48 the word Nijmegen is split wrong. It should be Nij-megen, instead of Ni-jmegen.
-
Lets be fair here ! Shockforce was a disaster at nearly all fronts ....
The initial release, yes. The subsequent patches, no.
-
Cool! Thanks for the effort!
-
I like building scale plastic kits and thought I might try my hand at a 1/35 T-72 modeled after the ones in Shock force; however, I'm finding it hard to research the exact details and differences between the variants, so I wanted to ask a couple of questions:
1. What is the difference between the T-72M1 (2001) and the TURMS-T? From what I can see, the T72M1 is pretty much the T-72BM, first revealed in 2006 according to Wikipedia. The best I am able to tell is that the M1 has a thermal sight, but that is all; the fire control system is not computerized, yet on the TURMS-T, it is.
2. What is the difference between the TURMS-T and the T-90? As far as I can tell, the T-90 can move faster and (I'm not sure) has better armor, but other than this, there is not much difference. What is the difference in armament and the fire control system? Is it superior?
I am aware of that fancy new anti-ATGM laser thing the Russians have, but I'm not seeing it on the Syrian models, so I guess we can leave that out.
3. What is the deal with that spotlight on the side of the turret? Is it even a spotlight? A long time ago, I thought it was the gunners sight. It disappears from the 2001 variant up and I think it appears on lower model soviet tanks, such as the T-55.
4. Finally, what is the deal with that hinged armor that you see opened up on the sides of the lower model T-72s? What is it for? To protect infantry?
Thanks in advance to all who reply.
The manual has actually got quite a lot of information as well
-
First, thanks for your service.
Second, that is how the game works. Spotting probability is weighted heavily to the current facing.That may be true, but I think the point is that the probability should change during shooting to reflect that the crew is focused on something. Much like being suppressed. Unless of course this what you meant
-
I don't read where that settles anything."Shock Force 2" is not the right title for the new game. Following the logic of our Families Shock Force = arid setting in Syria, so we need something new to call this particular flavor of temperate modern warfare. Black Sea is the development name. No idea what the actual name will be, but it's good enough for now
Note that we do intend to redo the original Shock Force content. It's going to be a huge undertaking because of all the changes that have taken place since the original engine was made. Same reason there's been no Upgrade offer for it. We would if we could, but the amount of work that needs to go into that is almost as if we're doing it from scratch. That game will be called Shock Force 2 and it will follow Black Sea.
Steve
Unless they plan to make a whole new backstory, "the original Shock Force content" to me implies that the 2008 storyline will be kept.
-
So will or should CM:SF II be a re-do of the 2008 storyline or a present day NATO intervention into civil war torn Syria?
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1456347&postcount=462
That should settle the matter.
-
If you have Steam, there is a group for Combat Mission games. Maybe worth having a look?
-
Yes that works. Actually, one could merely resize existing icons in photoshop, create a template blank 32 x 32 .bmp and then paste the resized images over the top. One would still have to edit the alpha though which, unless you've got photoshop, is an awful PITA; the alpha in .BMP format requires 32 bit support.
There are free open source program such as the gimp that lets you edit alpha channels as well. No need for photoshop for this.
-
First of all, I highly recommend the scenario!
**** SPOILER ****
I'm still trying to figure out how to capture NAI 1 without losing all of my men. I have deployed my Challengers in (really) close support, but remaining Syrians are still giving me a lot of problems
-
I don't know if these short battles are for the iPhone crowd, and is an attempt to create a stressed out wrist twitch experience. But, it's certainly not a direction for CM2 that I am happy with. And this is why folks like me still play more CM1 tournaments where one has more options than the CM2 repetitive straight ahead assault/ME engagements with tiny formations on ludicrously small maps. I still play more CMSF and CMA than the WW2 games for the same reason.
Weren't you the one advocating that scouts units get a magical spotting bonus?
-
Not often enough, I still lose
-
Erwin,
No idea, and I did spend some time with my nose in the CMBN manual--which I wish had an index. My recollection is that an HMG had to be packed up, moved, then deployed, but I could well be wrong. That is, though, what I observed while playing "Barkmann's Corner." I think. The manual talks about weapons listed as semi-deployed, which can apparently fire in that condition. I suspect, for both the HMG-34 and 42, this represents the bipod equipped gun firing while not on the tripod. Until the thing's fully deployed, I don't believe it can fire as an HMG.
Regards,
John Kettler
How about just starting the game and test it out
? -
In the 'Men With Suspicious Hats' scenario, I have just had a Pz4G (late) survive four direct hits with a PIAT, (two of them side-on) and stay fully functional.
I really don't know if this was down to it being a very lucky panzer or if it was due to a gremlin in the software!
SLR
Wow really lucky, normally the damage tabs shows all the colours of the rainbow!
-
The non-native speakers I can cut some slack. But the ones who have grown up in an English-speaking and writing environment but who still can't get it right (and can't even get close!) drive me crazy. Grrrrrrr.
:mad:
Michael
I believe the correct spelling is Ggrrr.
-
I guess you should consult the manual where on Mac the files are saved.
-
This is something that is definitely possible. This is, I think, the first request I've seen for it since CMSF was first released. Because moveable waypoints or not, the ability to click on movement lines and switch units is still applicable. So I don't feel too bad about forgetting about this behavior since in 6 years nobody that I know of has mentioned it until now
There's an argument to be made for the camera moving and a counter argument for keeping it stationary. I think the better way, most of the time, is to have the camera remain stationary. Though we can see what the testers thing for sure.
No fears about accidental waypoint movement. The behavior I'm picturing would be one click on a movement line to select the unit and then click/hold to move a waypoint. This is a pretty good safety feature to avoid accidental movement and it also is kinda necessary because waypoints aren't explicitly available except to current units.
Steve
Please make it so
, this + moveable waypoints makes fine tuning orders much much easier. -
• Start a game and choose '2 players - Email'. The game will then prompt you for a password.
• Enter a password and click OK. After that you will return to main screen of the game (don't
worry this is normal).
• Go to the 'outgoing email' folder where you installed CMBN, select the newly created
PBEM file (e.g. "newgame 001.ema") and send it to your opponent.
• Tell your opponent to put the file in his/her 'incoming email' folder.
• Tell your opponent to click 'saved game' in the main screen of CMBN and load the file you
sent to him/her. Then he/she will be prompted to enter a password.
• A new PBEM file will be created in his or her 'outgoing mail' folder (e.g. "newgame
002.ema") which has to be sent back to you.
• Repeat until finished.
-
I could be wrong, but we can do that now. Click on the line segment OR the waypoint and you move the waypoint.
Consider it backported into your build after your request.
Ken
Don't you need to have the unit selected first for that? I believe in CMx1 this was not necessary. Probably not top top priority but still
-
My elefant could see all enemy tanks - they were in plain sight and the elefant was the only German unit in the quickbattle.
Just checking, sometimes the relative LOS still confuses me
-
Can you post this test scenario up? I want to know how it looks like on mine.
-
Hmmm... I tried it again and the problem seems to be with multiple targets from different angles. It also got its priorities seriously off, going after a harmless HT and refusing to face the tanks on its flank.
Can it actually see the tanks?
-
For what's it worth, I did a side by side comparison between a clear day and a dense fog day and this is what it looks like.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycfhmvqpc7uyzpx/fog.png
I trust that the LOS of the troops are adjusted correctly, but visually it looks more like overcast than anything else. Or light foggy at best. I have a ATI HD5850.
-
I can predict from Steve's comments
some soldier models from Bn and Cw
I have these games already and paid 90 usd in total
so this should be a pack and priced a pack for bn+cw owners.
also may be a bundle with cw + bn as a pack for non owner of first two module
regards
why predict? just wait until you know the full content and price and decide then.
Boys Against Men MG Scenario
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
I just finished this one as the Germans in WEGO. Very enjoyable, the British put up a very mean fight. Platoon vs platoon my guys would always lose. Only mass concentrated fire + artillery support could dislodge the enemy!