SlapHappy
-
Posts
1,576 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SlapHappy
-
-
The Scimitar is REALLY weakly armored (oops, armoured!
). This is yet another thing to keep in mind; you REALLY need to use the Scimitar for RECON and long-range standoff fire against weakly-armed opposition. 
The only problem is: I'm supposed to go into that area and take those buildings away from a dug-in enemy with effective AT assets with those "light" recon armored units. And since those units are usually getting skagged before I can even get an ID on the enemy doing the shooting - It seems like the enemy is doing a better job than my recon units of detecting.
You really seem to pay a penalty in spotting when moving vs. a stationary enemy. Even when your units are supposed to be "scout" units. Whatever that means.
In CMSF, the term seems to mean "write it off early". If it weren't for the 2 challengers firepower (and staying power) and the highly effective artillery, the proper tactic in this scenario would be "sit still and wait for backup".
-
I realize that, but so's the LAV, and it just seems more....survivable. In the game, anyway.
The LAV seems to be able to stand up pretty well against the BMP-1 and 2 and is only outclassed by the BMP-3.
-
This thing is definitely not as menacing as it looks. Anything larger than 7.62 and these things die fast.
The crews seem to know it too, because they tend to jump out of them before things progress to that stage.
Sorta wish we had gotten the Sabre instead, the 7.62 chain gun would have been most awesome. The low number of HE rounds makes this less suited to combat infantry.
-
You're describing recieving incoming sniper fire from a rubbled building at dawn. Its only in Chuck Norris movies that snipers conveniently silhouette themselves in a doorway. If you, the player, have discerned that you're getting incoming from X location feel free to lay down as much suppressive fire as you like without first spotting the unit.
The game doesn't model a response to hearing the sound of a shot from a building's direction. I'm reminded of a scene from the movie "Full Metal Jacket". A Marine unit (in Hue?) recieves incoming sniper fire and EVERYBODY opens up on an open window. No resulting enemy casualty that we can tell, but no return fire from that window either.
The scene you are referring to is the one where a lone soldier moves INTO the LOS of a sniper who has oversight into a protected courtyard area formed by the surrounding buildings. When the first man is aided by one of the squad members, he also moves into LOS and is shot. Note that none of the other squad members are actually in the snipers enfilade area, though they do not know that and blaze away at the buildings in frustration.
The character "Mother" moves into a position near a corner and is out of LOS until he peeks around the corner and is almost shot. This is how the squad is able to determine the relative position of where the enemy fire is coming from.
-
Tardio
Actually that sounds about right. I probably AVERAGED 24 fps when I had my quad-core 2.4 ghz q6600. You have to remember that this game, unfortunately, DOES NOT SUPPORT MULTI-CORE PLATFORMS. When I changed to an E7400 Intel at 2.8 ghz, I saw a modest improvement overall. CMSF is highly CPU-dependent. Especially with a large number of units on-map. Even so, you can't compare an older generation chip like the x2 series to a core duo. The horsepower difference is even greater than the small difference in clock speed.
More CPU also means less chance of your game dipping to low on the MINIMUM frame rates, which is worse than having mediocre AVERAGE rates. When your minimums get down to below 12 fps that's when the game really takes a visible hit and seems laggy.
Also, it's apples and oranges to compare a game like CMSF to a first person shooter and other games that are all eye-candy with very little going on in the simulation end. (calcing LOS, bullet trajectories, etc.) These games are almost entirely dependent on the GPU to be so "beautiful". They are the computer game equivalent of Jessica Simpson - Nice to look at, but very little is going on in the brains department.
-
Oh sure.....blame it on the monkeys....always with the monkeys.
I have it on good authority that a lemur was the responsible party.
-
Oh oh....Dan's gone Full Gorilla........
You NEVER go Full Gorilla!
-
In nutshell, I guess, the difference between what you are talking about is re-stancing, while I am referring to repositioning...which doesn't necessarily force you to give up the preferred stance (prone).
-
That's some nice, detailed info about the way the system works. I've never had any issues myself with spotting or such as a function WYSIWYG. However, I have had some frustration with action spots and ACHIEVING a desirable LOF position barring the ability to individually tweak soldiers positions. Part of this I blame on TACAI limitations.
For instance, with building maneuvering, I've noticed that either on top of them or inside them troops in buildings will tend to gravitate to a position where they can bring the most individual firepower to bear on spotted enemies - especially those which are firing on them.
However, with terrain action spots, there is only one available end position achievable with your squad position. And if that leaves 3/4 of your squad out of LOS/LOF then tough noogies - They aren't going to renegotiate their position like they do in buildings.
Unfortunately I think this sort of falls under the part of your above comments where you state that squads don't understand what the top edge of a hill is. But even with that being the case, couldn't the AI simply say to a soldier element: move towards the coordinate direction where fire is originating and stop when enemy is spotted?
Of course, that leads to the question of how far can/should they travel if that is indeed unachievable.
Simulating reality really sucks..........
-
The videos were nice, but I want a peek at that on-line manual - That's where the juicy info is (or the changelog).
-
The sandbags do not offer protection either, IIRC.
Best regards,
Thomm
Really? Is that confirmed? I thought they simply did not block LOS?
-
Yep, they move around and they change type too, as I just discovered.
-
I was experimenting with map elements yesterday trying to create some defensive positions using terrain and flavor items.
In one instance, I placed a single medium crater and surrounded it with "sacks" in an attempt to mimic a "fighting hole" for a couple of soldiers to defend.
Unfortunately, every time I would start the game, the "sacks" would constantly shift from the placement I had given them on the map. And every time I restarted the game, the shift would be different, and seemingly, random.
Are there some terrain items and/or types which cause this to happen? What gives?
-
He's right, I definitely unzipped it to my scenarios folder properly and it shows up in the folder window, but not in the game selection window....weird. Some type of filename violation?
-
That's the inherent problem with a lot of these "rarely-themed" wargames out on the market. They state what they're TRYING to simulate, but they can't really give you the flavor of what makes one conflict essentially different from another. What makes the PTO different from the ETO in WWII? Well, lots of things, actually. But if you can't get those elements into your Pacific Theater game, all you're really doing is pushing some different 3D models and textures around on a map that looks different.
So often, if that's good enough for the player, that's touch luck.
-
The monkeys "clicking digits" are already worn off on this release...Their bloody finger stumps are pathetically trying to find purchase on the surface of the mouse...to no avail....gruesome, ain't it?
Only one thought pervades their primitive simian brains....."where the hell is it?"
Hopefully they won't see another long weekend of pathetically tossing their feces at passers-by for amusement......
Pathetic bunch, aren't they?
-
I agree that would be useful for many real-time players and is often found as a feature set in many of these types of games.
Also, it seems like a fairly easy feature add-on, although I could, and have, been wrong before.
-
All that beings said, I can understand that CMSF can't be called on to model close quarter combat inside of structures the same way that some first-person shooter can which is based entirely on simulating that type of event.
I believe CMSF falls firmly in the niche of a mid-level scale simulator. The good news is that I think it will work nicely for the WWII environment, as opposed to the current Syrian modern-day one where scale is maybe just a tad smaller than it needs to be closely simulate some of the armor warfare.
-
While I agree that a detailed interior modeling of the buildings is probably beyond the supportable inside the game engine, it is a little weird to see troops moving up "invisible" stairwells to the floor above or the roof. It comes across like some kind of zany mime performance. It also gives the impression that the troops are fighting over the possession of a series of stacked boxes in the more elaborate building constructions.
It's also interesting that even though the most minimal of interior items are not modelled inside of buildings, the vehicle models have quite complex interior views and you rarely have any reason or opportunity to see those at all!
-
I've noticed that in a couple of quick battles I have recently completed that pintle-mounted MG's tended to be reluctant to engage even when having spotted and available targets once their ammunition level dropped to 150 or less. Even when using the "Target Light" command, the firing is patchy and hesitant.
Could this be an ammo conversation routine built-in to the TAC-AI?
-
I think you guys are swatting at phantoms....I don't think this has anything to do with the graphics card.
Best thing to do is start a reporting thread and have individuals who suffer from this problem list off a VERY detailed rundown of software drivers and hardware on their systems.
Proper troubleshooting can be arduous, but it's the only way to ensure any hope of progress on this weird problem.
-
Temporary Places is located inside the GE GUI panel.
-
MarkEzra
I switched microprocessors and motherboard on my system because of a motherboard failure and the problem for me seems to have gone away (so far).
I'm still running on Intel, but I switched from a Q6600 to an E7400 and an Intel motherboard from an Nvidia chipset. Nothing else in my system changed except the problems with QB's. Could this be a problem with certain multi-core processors? Or even possibly chipsets?
-
Excepting for the annoying fact that even goats (which aren't particularly cuddly, admittedly) are light years beyond a fly on the sentient level and are fully capable of suffering just like humans.
I doubt anyone would argue that the reaction to Obama's eviscerating a goat on camera would be decidedly different from whacking a pesky fly.
). This is yet another thing to keep in mind; you REALLY need to use the Scimitar for RECON and long-range standoff fire against weakly-armed opposition. 
What is wrong with the snipers?
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
My experiences tend to back up what Pad is saying here. I've played several scenarios with the different sniper units including the new British ones and concentrated almost exclusively on trying to get targets for the snipers to the exclusion of trying to actually win the scenario.
In many cases, a larger team of regular infantry can spot an enemy and not the sniper just in the next action spot over. At that proximity, you would think the infantry could aid the nearby sniper in IDing the potential target, but that doesn't seem to be happening here. The NUMBER of eyeballs, and not WHAT TYPE of eyeballs seems to be the deciding factor.