Jump to content

slysniper

Members
  • Content Count

    3,124
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    slysniper got a reaction from IanL in possible atgm bug?   
    yes, normally the action square just behind the one the unit is in.
    I will try and set up a test map and see if I can create what we are discussing
  2. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from BletchleyGeek in Foxhole?   
    Good suggestion, I have found the same at times, but no perfect answer.
    The amount of men is also a factor as George  MC points out. But it does go beyond that and is a imperfection as to how well the game works here.
    For I have seen this same issue with trenches also, which is a little harder to explain than having enough foxholes.
    But again splitting your men into smaller groups does help and improves the units use of the terrain feature.
     
  3. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from Josey Wales in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    there HAS NEVER BEEN GAME BREAKING BUGS.
    Now the bugs in the 4.0 version is game breaking  in a sense in arty  and infantry reaction to it if you are not accepting of it, but all it has ever taken is to play the game in version 3.0 before that change was made.
    what you have is 4.0 format not a good format for play against the AI if you are using arty. Any other way the game is played has been fine, 4.0 is good except for a few other issues.
    For those needing to bomb the heck out of AI troops, 3.0 was always still available.
    Yes, was it a issue that buying the upgrade and not getting the fix all this time was bad form. Of course it was, but don't act like the game is been unplayable, for it has not.
    You all know 4.01 fixes the problems, the releases are close at hand, after all this time you might as well take your chill pills because nothing on your part is making it happen any faster.
     
  4. Like
    slysniper reacted to Macisle in Why so little community content?   
    Lots of good points in this thread. Two more things to add:
    Having two briefing presentation options, one with and one without graphics, might help. The with option would be like it is now. The without option could be a layout that looks complete with only briefing text, like say, the text on top of a stock wallpaper graphic with all the other graphic frames removed. Taking away the workload of having to provide graphics (with ever-increasing expectations) might help more designers opt to go the extra mile to make their work public. A big part of the reason that there are not more public scenarios is that the workload increase from private to public scenarios is HUGE, while the payoff for making a scenario public may be minimal, or basically nothing. So, unless you really enjoy the whole process of producing a public scenario and don't require any real feedback or acknowledgment, you are likely not to opt to go public with your work once the novelty of doing it wears off. It's really a question of time investment vs. reward. Once you know your way around the Editor, you can create very enjoyable content in a very small amount of time using house rules to cover any rough edges. So, say, 30 minutes in the Editor might give you between 1 and 3 days of entertainment. And, if you go big and do like 60-120 minutes of setup, you might get weeks or even months of fun with a private monster battle.

    But, if you decide to go public with it, instead of 30-120 minutes of setup and days or weeks of fun play, you are looking at days and weeks of setup and personal testing, producing graphics, finding testers, getting feedback, tweaking, testing. In other words, you've just added a job to your life, the payoff for which might be little to no feedback and no money. So again, unless you get adequate personal satisfaction from the whole process and don't require much or any reward beyond that, it's not a hard call. I would REALLY encourage players to learn the Editor and get into making personal scenarios, though. Once you know your way around well, you've got unlimited play value in your CM title and it's not hard to produce very enjoyable, scenario-like content. Working in the Editor can become an enjoyable hobby in itself that even rivals the fun you get from playing the game.
    As for things that might facilitate more public scenarios, basically, anything that reduces the designer workload/time requirement would help. Being able to copy-paste map sections and copy-rotate buildings in the 3D view would be an epic time saver. However, that seems like a mighty amount of work on the coding side.
    For now, I'd say the no-graphics briefing layout option could be a good, very low-cost way for BF to take some of the workload off both would-be and veteran designers. That could yield some fruit in the way of more public scenarios.
  5. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from IronCat60 in AT gun firing back despite full suppression. Intended?   
    Its one of those situations where, show me that it happens all the time before I get worked up about it. If you can show it happening at some type of unusual rate, then its something to worry about.
    One time is , wow that was cool - move on.
    I had a lone survivor on a heavy machine gun, pinned, suppressed and being fired on, manage to return fire and kill at least 30 assaulting troops on his location. The bad part of all that was I was the assaulting side of the situation.
    Should it of happened per game mechanics. NO
    but it did, it was one of those moments where the game did a unusual thing. (it was a medal of honor moment) it was pretty cool actually.
    Has the game ever done it again in the years that have followed, nothing even close.
    Move on and drop it unless this is a reoccurring problem.
  6. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from Ted in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    there HAS NEVER BEEN GAME BREAKING BUGS.
    Now the bugs in the 4.0 version is game breaking  in a sense in arty  and infantry reaction to it if you are not accepting of it, but all it has ever taken is to play the game in version 3.0 before that change was made.
    what you have is 4.0 format not a good format for play against the AI if you are using arty. Any other way the game is played has been fine, 4.0 is good except for a few other issues.
    For those needing to bomb the heck out of AI troops, 3.0 was always still available.
    Yes, was it a issue that buying the upgrade and not getting the fix all this time was bad form. Of course it was, but don't act like the game is been unplayable, for it has not.
    You all know 4.01 fixes the problems, the releases are close at hand, after all this time you might as well take your chill pills because nothing on your part is making it happen any faster.
     
  7. Like
    slysniper reacted to puje in New Afghanistan inspired campaign: Valleys of Death   
    After months in the making, I have finally completed my campaign Valleys of Death. It turned our to be quite an ambitious project, with 11 missions!
    The campaign revolves around a US Army light infantry company, manning a remote combat outpost in an Afghanistan inspired terrain.
    Unlike classic CMSF, which highly favors shock and awe and maneuver warfare, Valleys of Death deals with the issues of small units operating in a clearly defined AO. This means that, like in real life, you will conduct operations on the same map many times, with each mission focusing on different areas and objectives. By the end you will come to know the area very well, and this knowledge is key to defeat the enemy.
    Features:
        11 missions     A large 2X2 km map and 2 additional maps     Modern counter-insurgency infantry combat     Heavily inspired by Afghanistan related media (Restrepo, Taking Fire, etc.)     Base game, no modules needed



     
    Download from Dropbox
    Please let me know ASAP if this link doesn't work! I'm not exactly a Dropbox wizz  
  8. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from Panzer_Freak in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    there HAS NEVER BEEN GAME BREAKING BUGS.
    Now the bugs in the 4.0 version is game breaking  in a sense in arty  and infantry reaction to it if you are not accepting of it, but all it has ever taken is to play the game in version 3.0 before that change was made.
    what you have is 4.0 format not a good format for play against the AI if you are using arty. Any other way the game is played has been fine, 4.0 is good except for a few other issues.
    For those needing to bomb the heck out of AI troops, 3.0 was always still available.
    Yes, was it a issue that buying the upgrade and not getting the fix all this time was bad form. Of course it was, but don't act like the game is been unplayable, for it has not.
    You all know 4.01 fixes the problems, the releases are close at hand, after all this time you might as well take your chill pills because nothing on your part is making it happen any faster.
     
  9. Upvote
    slysniper got a reaction from Gafford in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    there HAS NEVER BEEN GAME BREAKING BUGS.
    Now the bugs in the 4.0 version is game breaking  in a sense in arty  and infantry reaction to it if you are not accepting of it, but all it has ever taken is to play the game in version 3.0 before that change was made.
    what you have is 4.0 format not a good format for play against the AI if you are using arty. Any other way the game is played has been fine, 4.0 is good except for a few other issues.
    For those needing to bomb the heck out of AI troops, 3.0 was always still available.
    Yes, was it a issue that buying the upgrade and not getting the fix all this time was bad form. Of course it was, but don't act like the game is been unplayable, for it has not.
    You all know 4.01 fixes the problems, the releases are close at hand, after all this time you might as well take your chill pills because nothing on your part is making it happen any faster.
     
  10. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from Wicky in Flamethrower?   
    When used correct, the results are fine. Nothing wrong with the flame thrower, its the person using it. 
    Every time something does not work for you does not mean the game has a issue.
    To use effectively on the offence, the method that must be used to likely get the results you need is likely one of these two things.
    Don't try to take on the enemy in a fire fight, flame throwers must be moved into locations that they receive no returning fire.
    Per most military doctrines that is done by smoking the target to allow the flame thrower to move into place. Use smoke correctly and you will get them where you need to get them to go.
    Second, I find that I can fire them at area target locations one hex away from the target and get the needed results. So you don't need to expose yourself to the target, if cover is available and you can get target to the adjacent hex you are likely good to go. Also a bust or two on adjacent hex might not do the job, but move that one additional hex right after the bust to target directly on target also will likely work. Flame does a great job of putting the enemy troops into a state that they are not going to recover from quickly.
    Try using these methods before saying flame throwers don't work correctly in game.
  11. Upvote
    slysniper got a reaction from Warts 'n' all in Flamethrower?   
    When used correct, the results are fine. Nothing wrong with the flame thrower, its the person using it. 
    Every time something does not work for you does not mean the game has a issue.
    To use effectively on the offence, the method that must be used to likely get the results you need is likely one of these two things.
    Don't try to take on the enemy in a fire fight, flame throwers must be moved into locations that they receive no returning fire.
    Per most military doctrines that is done by smoking the target to allow the flame thrower to move into place. Use smoke correctly and you will get them where you need to get them to go.
    Second, I find that I can fire them at area target locations one hex away from the target and get the needed results. So you don't need to expose yourself to the target, if cover is available and you can get target to the adjacent hex you are likely good to go. Also a bust or two on adjacent hex might not do the job, but move that one additional hex right after the bust to target directly on target also will likely work. Flame does a great job of putting the enemy troops into a state that they are not going to recover from quickly.
    Try using these methods before saying flame throwers don't work correctly in game.
  12. Upvote
    slysniper got a reaction from IanL in Flamethrower?   
    When used correct, the results are fine. Nothing wrong with the flame thrower, its the person using it. 
    Every time something does not work for you does not mean the game has a issue.
    To use effectively on the offence, the method that must be used to likely get the results you need is likely one of these two things.
    Don't try to take on the enemy in a fire fight, flame throwers must be moved into locations that they receive no returning fire.
    Per most military doctrines that is done by smoking the target to allow the flame thrower to move into place. Use smoke correctly and you will get them where you need to get them to go.
    Second, I find that I can fire them at area target locations one hex away from the target and get the needed results. So you don't need to expose yourself to the target, if cover is available and you can get target to the adjacent hex you are likely good to go. Also a bust or two on adjacent hex might not do the job, but move that one additional hex right after the bust to target directly on target also will likely work. Flame does a great job of putting the enemy troops into a state that they are not going to recover from quickly.
    Try using these methods before saying flame throwers don't work correctly in game.
  13. Upvote
    slysniper got a reaction from Heirloom_Tomato in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    there HAS NEVER BEEN GAME BREAKING BUGS.
    Now the bugs in the 4.0 version is game breaking  in a sense in arty  and infantry reaction to it if you are not accepting of it, but all it has ever taken is to play the game in version 3.0 before that change was made.
    what you have is 4.0 format not a good format for play against the AI if you are using arty. Any other way the game is played has been fine, 4.0 is good except for a few other issues.
    For those needing to bomb the heck out of AI troops, 3.0 was always still available.
    Yes, was it a issue that buying the upgrade and not getting the fix all this time was bad form. Of course it was, but don't act like the game is been unplayable, for it has not.
    You all know 4.01 fixes the problems, the releases are close at hand, after all this time you might as well take your chill pills because nothing on your part is making it happen any faster.
     
  14. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from IanL in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    there HAS NEVER BEEN GAME BREAKING BUGS.
    Now the bugs in the 4.0 version is game breaking  in a sense in arty  and infantry reaction to it if you are not accepting of it, but all it has ever taken is to play the game in version 3.0 before that change was made.
    what you have is 4.0 format not a good format for play against the AI if you are using arty. Any other way the game is played has been fine, 4.0 is good except for a few other issues.
    For those needing to bomb the heck out of AI troops, 3.0 was always still available.
    Yes, was it a issue that buying the upgrade and not getting the fix all this time was bad form. Of course it was, but don't act like the game is been unplayable, for it has not.
    You all know 4.01 fixes the problems, the releases are close at hand, after all this time you might as well take your chill pills because nothing on your part is making it happen any faster.
     
  15. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from Heirloom_Tomato in Shock Force 2 Unofficial Screenshot And Video Thread   
    Well played, a very good use of your units.
    I am always amazed as to how well the game will use some real world tactics to achieve a good result.
    Very sneaky of you as to using the 9m14 as a way to direct the enemy units where you want them.
     
    I have dismounted tank crews before to get spots but have not thought about the chain of command as well and how that can get all  my units the info.
    Also have baited the enemy to expose their flank to me but normally with a bmp or something along that lines, I like the concept of using the missile. Likely its the only thing they will ever do but it can add to a possible good outcome.
     
    If you play h2h, people better watch out, sounds like you have your act together.
     
     
     
     
  16. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from IanL in Shock Force 2 Unofficial Screenshot And Video Thread   
    Well played, a very good use of your units.
    I am always amazed as to how well the game will use some real world tactics to achieve a good result.
    Very sneaky of you as to using the 9m14 as a way to direct the enemy units where you want them.
     
    I have dismounted tank crews before to get spots but have not thought about the chain of command as well and how that can get all  my units the info.
    Also have baited the enemy to expose their flank to me but normally with a bmp or something along that lines, I like the concept of using the missile. Likely its the only thing they will ever do but it can add to a possible good outcome.
     
    If you play h2h, people better watch out, sounds like you have your act together.
     
     
     
     
  17. Like
    slysniper reacted to Aurelius in Shock Force 2 Unofficial Screenshot And Video Thread   
    I bailed my Coy HQ tank and used the crew to observe enemy movement (harder to spot a man that lies in prone position, than it is to spot a T62 turret). I parked one of the Plt HQ tanks near my company commander, who then shared his spots with platoon commander. The information got passed through the platoon network. Next step was choosing hull down positions. With contacts already passed through platoon network, the job was already half done. Having my tanks unbuttoned/opened up and with previous knowledge of enemy positions and movements, has made my tanks spot M1's almost instantly. I was lucky to catch one platoon on the move. Movement reduced their spotting ability, which I fully used to my advantage. The second platoon of M1's was destroyed by combining efforts of my Company commander observing, 9M14 Malyutka's blinding the M1's and T62's finishing the jobs with flanking shots.
  18. Like
    slysniper reacted to Bozowans in Shock Force 2 Unofficial Screenshot And Video Thread   
    Here's a lucky shot. I was just playing the U.S. Army, trying to be extra careful, advancing very slowly and cautiously, using dead ground to move troops forward and hull down positions for every vehicle and then everything went horribly wrong.
    I parked an M1 tank in a hull down position along the side of a road when a Kornet opened fire on it. Here's the view from the ATGM position at maximum zoom:

     
    The missile missed the tank, flying right over the top of it. It continued to fly for another 40 meters through the woods behind it until it just so happened to slam into a tree RIGHT in the middle of an infantry squad moving through the woods.


     
    The infantry were in dead ground behind that road embankment and were not even visible from the ATGM position, and I thought they would be safe moving through the woods. The missile miraculously flew past several other trees just so it could hit the one right in the center of the squad. One man was killed, another incapacitated, and every other member of the squad was wounded except for two.

    The next turn I tried to pull the tank back and hide it behind some trees, but part of its turret was still visible and it was knocked out from the front by a second missile. I guess you really don't wanna mess around with those Kornets. 
  19. Upvote
    slysniper got a reaction from LukeFF in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    What would you prefer, Released updates that work as thy should or released updates that have errors and no effort to test, correct and fix before giving them to you.
    I prefer the first personally and you can rest assured that they are working on and preparing to give you the first option. That is how they do business, they never rush stuff out, they seem to always try and give a release that they feel good about. and believe to be working cleanly.
    But making comments here about where is it will not make it happen any quicker, just saying
  20. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from IanL in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    I be pretty concerned if they had been working on the patch all that time, over 2 years and you really think they been working on it all that time.
    They been working on things and you know what they are, They gave us CMSF2, with said patch (Why , because that is where they decided to put their focus, why. Because another group of people have been asking for that for many years now also. ) Someone wins, someone loses. 
    So if you play that, you see what will be coming when they get it finished. 
    Steve said, the updating of the campaigns for CMSF2 and the patches were their next priority. 
    So I would suspect the next thing we see will likely be them. (Just a little longer folks)
  21. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from Myles Keogh in Barbarossa   
    Nor should we think that this game would ever really be attractive to the average gamer. because it will not.
    If nothing else can prove that, just look at war gaming throughout its history. It shows that it has a appeal to only a certain part of society.
     
    I think the likeliest exception to that would be the close combat series. it would be interesting to see the numbers on it as to sells.
     
    But for sure, BF is not having to cater to the general public. Most of its market does and would appreciate any period they sell to. But there still has to be a difference in sells or they would not care at all.
  22. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from RockinHarry in Barbarossa   
    Nor should we think that this game would ever really be attractive to the average gamer. because it will not.
    If nothing else can prove that, just look at war gaming throughout its history. It shows that it has a appeal to only a certain part of society.
     
    I think the likeliest exception to that would be the close combat series. it would be interesting to see the numbers on it as to sells.
     
    But for sure, BF is not having to cater to the general public. Most of its market does and would appreciate any period they sell to. But there still has to be a difference in sells or they would not care at all.
  23. Like
    slysniper got a reaction from IanL in Barbarossa   
    Nor should we think that this game would ever really be attractive to the average gamer. because it will not.
    If nothing else can prove that, just look at war gaming throughout its history. It shows that it has a appeal to only a certain part of society.
     
    I think the likeliest exception to that would be the close combat series. it would be interesting to see the numbers on it as to sells.
     
    But for sure, BF is not having to cater to the general public. Most of its market does and would appreciate any period they sell to. But there still has to be a difference in sells or they would not care at all.
  24. Upvote
    slysniper got a reaction from The_MonkeyKing in campaign Semper Fi - AAVs everywhere   
    I rode around in one of them in the mid 80"s for a summer.
    I recall no extra seats, and if there was room it was filled with gear.
    back then, there was 13 men squads, you might have part of the weapons platoon assigned to you , so that was either a MG team of mortar squad generally.  the track crew I recall was 3 back then, so at least one of those guys was in the back with us.
    Also they were notorious for brake-downs and mech. problems. So it was not uncommon to have to add in additional guys from another track that would have to be left behind.
     
    But compared to every thing else out there, they are like a hotel with first class options as to space we had.
    Not bad other than slower than all heck and so large that a no one has a excuse for not hitting them with whatever they are firing at them at max. range. 
     
    Needless to say, never wanted to ride in one if it was going into a real battle zone.
  25. Upvote
    slysniper got a reaction from Heirloom_Tomato in Weekend Challenge Battle   
    Well, I am sad to see that this latest scenario did not get any more interest than it did.

    Out of your releases, this is by far the best one I enjoyed while playing through it.

    It presented the most challenges and interesting decisions one needs to have to make.


     

     
    Recap below “Spoiler”


     

     

     
    That latest scenario is much harder than my score reflects.

    I had made the decision from the set up I was not going to follow his instructions to not bomb the buildings

    I was looking at the map and with the forces I had, said to myself, no way, those buildings are the only thing that has a view to the ravine and open area I need to cross with my troops so they have to go.

    I had made the decision to go up the left flank and the buildings were the only defensive terrain that had a good view. Remove them and I have a chance.

    So I set the planes to bomb the two large buildings on the left with preorders before the battle and then was hoping to take out the ones on the right also if I had bombs left.

    Needless to say the second the planes showed up I had the forest on the left side erupt in anti-aircraft fire. I thought there had to be at least 4 AA guns over there, only saw one with a hard spot on it so I was not sure what was in there, but I saw 3 firing at once for sure.

    So one turn of air and I cancelled the bombing run, the result was the first two bombs missed and the 3rd hit, thus the one lost structure seen in the image. One bomb was left to use later.

    Needless to say, my mortars and one remaining bomb on the plane were used to clear the woods of all the guns I exposed on the left flank. While the woods received that attention, I ordered the infantry to infiltrate up to the walls on my side of the ravine but had them stay hidden til I dropped the one remaining heavy bomb on the woods, then I started my attack immediately after the bomb drop, exposed my infantry and then started assaulting on the left flank.

    One Machine Gun was firing back from those buildings up on the ridge at that point.

    Just after starting this action there was a welcome surprise of armor appearing, I had the Stewart go into action immediately to solve my problem with infantry fire from those overlooking buildings on the ridge. Now that kept the machine gun fire from there quiet, I only used light fire against it so as to not damage any more structures per the requested orders given.

    The enemy also receives armor support about at this time. So the 76er’s become the tool to take care of that.

    So as long as you get the jump on the enemy armor this is not a problem. If you lose this duel, this battle can become much uglier very quick I would suspect.

    So I pushed the left flank and became aware of how well my arty and bomb run did on that area, finding I had removed more than I knew even existed in those woods.

    The enemy was not done trying to hold on to this location and another little group of reinforcements arrived.

    After handling them. I sent the Stewart up the left flank to where I had my infantry, with the Stewart leading the way and the infantry in support I crossed behind the vines to the structures on the ridge right flank and did my final mop up operations.


     

     
    After thoughts:

    If I had not exposed the enemy location from the very early start of the battle, this would have been a much harder challenge. There is a large likelihood if the woods are not pre-bombed before any assault, friendly losses are going to add up from what is there in defenses.

    I should have thought about hitting the left flank woods from what we are told in his briefing, but I didn’t.

    So in truth, I was lucky in this engagement in that I made a terrible decision, had my air power exposed to the full effects of the enemies defenses and instead of suffering from poor decisions, turned it into my advantages.

    So it never hurts to be a little lucky.


     
×
×
  • Create New...