birdstrike

I think we've all been there:

"on" sorry

Sounds good. The additional BMPs and tanks will help the player to use an offensive gameplay, this will make it easier to keep the momentum of the attack especially after taking the city. I would have liked to see the GLs, but the mortars are fair enough. For the tactical picture: If you can't see the map from higher elevation levels, you need to turn shadows, that should make it visible again.

Haha thanks, hope your buddies also enjoy it.

I think the ammunition of the GLs is sufficient if they are primarily used to attack entrenched AT units (ATGMS and RCLs). Of course, if the player wastes their ammo on other units... again, depending on how much help you want to give the player, perhaps a little hint in the briefing can clear that up, something like "we also attached some GLs to deal with ATGMS" or something like that?

This is excellent! Thanks a lot!

You have to look for the blue barrels in the edtor, they are the only ones which have that option.

No problem, Pandur. Concerning the grenade launchers, have you considered cramping them into a UAZ from the special forces guys or into one of the FOs? Or perhaps delet one of the ATGMs to put them in one of their BMP-1s? To solve the artillery delay problem, some hints on the tactical map in the briefing could give the player the option to use pre-planned arty strikes against "suspected" enemy positions. I used all of the heavy artillery this way which sped things up considerabely in the beginning. IIRC, I used pre planned strikes against the northern and southern bridge areas and the main road towards the financial district. If you want to adapt the map to the reduced battle size, I'd say remove the tanks, ATGMs, the SF (maybe leave the engineers) and perhaps 1 platoon from each company. Maybe leave one tank for blue. Give red fewer tanks to start with and reposition them somewhere in the city. Just a thought... About the full battle size: I was also thinking if the battle could be split up into 2 missions (1st attack city, 2nd proceed to norhtern village) essentially forming a small campaign. It should be possible to use the same map in both missions, but AFAIK any terrain damage is not carried over - I have to admit I'm still learning how to make a campaign, so I don't know if and how this can be done properly.

Yes, very enjoyable mission, indeed. Nice how you're at first struggling to survive the initial minutes until help arrives. I also missed the demo charges at first, but it's managable without. It also puts some more pressure on the player, and as you said, they should be unprepared. I'd reccommend adding some flavor objects to improve the overall look of the map. And the victory conditions should be somewhat refined. For example, the current threshold for US casualties seems quite generous . To get the briefing in the right order, you can extract an existing briefing from another mission to see how they are compiled then just fill in your own text.

So as I understand it, units by themselves are totally unaware of other friendly units in their vicinity - the comm-network is the only defining link between units with the player filling in the "information gaps". For the tank phone to work as it should, there first had to be be introduced some check for adjacent infantry for the engine(?) (I remember that scene from "Full Metal Jacket" where one of the Marines uses the phone on the back of an M48) And the current comm system works more like this:(?) A squad riding in a Stryker would first pass its information to the PL commander who then relays it to the Stryker? For a squad passing information to a tank in the same battallion, the information must first go through the chain of command from the infantry squad to PLCO up to COCO and BTCO then back down to the tank COCO, tank PLCO and the tank - with faster relay for units with FBCB2 access (from the infantry PLCO to FBCB2 network then directly to the tank?)

From the CMSF manual p 163 about the M1A1HC SA: "This is a M1A1HC with various “Situational Awareness” equipment upgrades added on. These enhancements include [...] externally mounted tank-infantry phone[...]." I was just wondering to what degree this is modeled in the game. Do we get a quicker information relay between tank and infantry nearby than with the standard HC variant?

Nice work . I especially like the handcuffs and the new vest, though I have to admit I somehow liked your old camelback texture better.

I've noticed an issue when breaching a wall directly attached to a building. The test setup was a large building with a solid wall directly attached to a high wall. I set the BLAST waypoint inside the building: Both walls (building and high wall) are demolished, but the squad moves around the wall instead of through the breach. I tried removing the building wall, using just the high wall instead, but the results were the same as above. However, removing the high wall (using only the building wall) works - so I reckon it has something to do with the AI not recognizing that the high wall was destroyed along with the building wall. What makes things really odd is that I have scenario, where for one building it is possible to breach through a building and a wall sucessfully, while the breaching though the building wall right next to it does not work. I have the savegames, if required.

Here's a little observation I made and I'd like to share: it is possible to breach a wall by placing the "BLAST" waypoint directly in front of the target wall, instead of behind it. This way your unit will not move through the wall.

Thanks Yes, that's how the scenario is supposed to be played and exactly the way the AI plays it (if everything works correctly) .

That's cool! Just what was missing.

With the major issues patched, I have a small request for the editor: there is currently no way to rename the HQ unit of a given formation. You can enter a different name, but the unit will still be displayed with its original HQ designation in the game.

I'd suggest you should first see if there really is a problem, before worrying about that. I'm running the paradox version without any problems so far. If there really is a problem, you might have to mail to paradox customer service about the Securom issue - at least that's what I've heard. About the manual, AFAIK there is currently no seperate manual available for purchasing, you'll have to settle with the pdf for now.

Yes, nice work, thanks.

You can move flavor objects and change the look of buildings as in the normal 3D view. The only major drawback is you have to go to the units' screen first.

Yes, he was very helpful in that matter. He forwarded the issue to BFC who are looking into the problem. So, it should get fixed - though of course there is no guarantee it will be in for 1.08. But we'll see.

I know that problem I used the editor to put the squads in the same locations as in your screenshots and got the same results as you showed, except for the palm tree. I also put enemy units on some roofs to check if they are visible. The sniper unit in the crater was unable to see them. For the "tree guys": I got a grey LOS to both the tree and the roofs beyond. units on the roof could be attacked by part of the unit - it was also easy to pinpoint which soldiers were in LOS to the roof since they were the only ones who fired. To make my point, soldiers who were further up to the crest could see the target, those behind the wall to the right (bridge) and further down, couldn't. This would seem the LOS mechanism works correctly here, and it's an issue of units not positioning themselves on the ridge for the whole unit to have a LOS on the target. In the 3rd picture (3 MG guys looking at roofs) this seems to work as it should. Units are positioned up on the ridge, no LOS problems. The LOS for units in the crater does not seem to work properly because the units are prone and are thus considered not to look over the edge of the crater (if I had to make a guess I'd say it is related to the issue I mentioned before - see also the thread here)

I use whatever cover there is. Else, I'd say it largely depends what you're up against. Roofs and balconies are generally exposed, dangerous places. HE is dangerous to anything be it in a building or a trench. Though I would agree trenches do offer somewhat more protection, especially against small arms, but only until the first airburst shells come flying.

Not with the "normal" 3D preview. But you can use the "place units" 3D screen for this. The game remembers the last camera position for each side seperately.

I can't say for sure, but it seems the roof you're looking at in the 1st screenshot is below the street level of your snipers, or at least there is not enough of the roof visible to give them a viable LOS to the spot (for example to area fire the building). What seems odd to me is that the LOS-line is blue at the beginning. Have you been able to engage enemies on the roof of that buidling (or any adjacent building)? In the 3rd screenshot it seems alright the snipers have a LOS out of the crater but the reverse slope is out of place. But again there is no unit. From my experience I would expect any unit at the same spot (reverse slope) would still be visible and in LOF despite what the LOS to the ground says. EDIT: before I make any assumptions here, there is a known issue with ELOS and low walls (discussed in another thread) - if this is also related to the same issue, any unit on the reverse-slope spot should not be visible. Can you check this C3K? Maybe by moving another friendly unit there? (when it's safe)