GSX
-
Posts
938 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by GSX
-
-
I don't recall him ever saying definitely. I wouldn't hold my breath for Normandy this year, though as I read the tea leaves the NATO module has a good shot.
Yes he did, he stated it in this forum that CM Normandy would definitely be out before 2009 is over. Not once since has he gone back on this as far as I can tell.
-
You do realize that this 2008 invasion of Syria is fictional and didn't actually happen, don't you?. What the German government did or did not do in 2008 is irrelevant, as an alternate history allows for alternate choices on their part.
The back story gives a great deal of leeway for how various European governments might respond to the events. They do not, however, really give Syria leeway to purchase the Russian military.
Ah alternative history, now were talking. The Russians, seeing their waning influence in the Middle East decide to commit their forces to aid the Syrians............ just a thought. So if were having alternate histories, why not add this alternate and call it the Russian module....
The trouble with alternates is that we can all make up what we want then.
Cheers for being patronising though, it made me feel all warm and tingly....
-
Um, you WILL be seeing German soldiers.
This has been said for some time now.FYI, I've been doing international security policy research at a German university for the last couple of months, and from what I've learned Germany's policy seems to be leaning more and more towards actual interventionism in cases like the fictional background as presented in CM:SF. Getting a little OT, here, though.
This may be a pointer to German intervention in the future but CMSF is set in 3 months in 2008. Thats last year by the way and as of last year the German government werent into such interventions.
It seems a bit improbable then to include any German forces in a NATO module that wouldnt have them there in real life. I find it strange that the rationale to leave out Russian equipment does not get applied to any Blue equipment.
-
Normandy and NATO (and Afghanistan) are in parallel development right now. Which will come out first is yet to be seen (could well be in reverse order of what I wrote above)
So as Steve has stated that Normandy will definitely be out this year, that means that all of the above will be available before 31 Dec 2009.
This is good news indeed, 3 CMs in just the next 5 months.
Looks like Xmas time may be the right time to take all my untaken leave then....
-
That's not really the point. It would be nice to be able to choose your forces at all. Would you really choose to assault the enemy with nothing but TOW missiles?
This actually happens so often that Im beginnning to think that its how its done in real life now.
-
I'm one of those guys who prefer NOT to have civilians in a tactical wargame as I prefer to keep it clean, so Steve is not just making guys like me up. I realise it may be more realistic at times but I want to be "playing" a wargame not simulating everything a real war entails.
I also have no desire to play wargames loaded down with civvies. The clue is in the 'games' element. I just personally think it wouldnt be fun at all to include them, does your AI then aid them when they get blown up?
-
If your completely done with CM-1, then at what point if any would you consider making it 'freeware'?
I'm sure that once your revenue stream ends on it, or if its bringing in negligible funds then others may be able to work on it?
Or is it somehow connected to the CM-2 code?
I stress again that I know next to nothing about PC 'voodoo' but it does seem a shame to simply let a good game wither, no matter how old it is.
-
Try the Demo and give it a few days to a week to get used to the different controls etc.
Its not RT though if thats what your after but it is certainly more balanced than CMSF and in addition to all those scenarios there is a good Quick Battle system too.
-
I think it's patently ridiculous to say that the British military has been neglected since the 1650s. There weren't even any social programs to spend money on before the 19th century and something like 75% of the national budget for all nations went towards their militaries. Perhaps you could say that about the post WW2 military, but then probably most European militaries were neglected post war since they could always rely on Uncle Sam to bail them out of a jam. The French have deployed troops overseas in many locations since WW2, but like the British most of these commitments were to ex colonies and don't require much as far as 'heavy' forces go. It really just depends on doctrine and what type of war you plan to fight. I think doctrinally the US, at least since WW2, has had a 'firepower' doctrine and the US force reflects that. UK forces may have a different doctrine so maybe the force mix is right for what they plan on doing.
I knew some smartarse would have a long winded answer. Mind you, a very good long winded answer.
Though my point, if missed, was that, no military ever gets everything it ever wants.
Thanks for educating me though.
-
Steve
I'm not going to banter back and forth as I actually agree with most if not all youve been saying. But Im on the inside looking out and your not. I know that the UK militaries equipment and conditions have improved immensly since I joined.
In all honesty though, theres just not enough of us and not much money for more and so this gets prevalence in a media that is interested in casualties.
I'm talking about the widespread media reports of British polls disapproving of continuing involvement in Afghanistan and the withdrawal of forces from Iraq rather prematurely. The fiasco that followed the Basra pullout is one major indication of that.I can only say that your above statement reflects the very reason we are in Afghanistan. Its democracy at work. We were due to leave Iraq 31 Dec 2008, the Iraqi government asked us to leave as our mandate was over. Right now all the Brits still in Iraq are sitting in Kuwait as the Iraqi government is sticking to its mandate. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/British-Troops-In-Iraq-Are-Moved-To-Kuwait-Because-They-Do-Not-Have-Permission-To-Stay/Article/200907415348035?f=rss
As a military force we can only do what the Government of our nation tells us to and they, being democratic should follow the will of the people, something all democracies have to live with. As Mr Churchil said, democracy is the worst form of government, except for the rest!
So now we are commited to Afghanistan, until such time as the UK government pulls out. Until that time we will do our best with limited resources - as we always have.
-
Not to mention the horrific trigger pull, the difficulties of mag changes, the difficulties of shooting prone with one, the crappy balance, and numerous model-specific problems.
Hmm, Ive used the SA-80 for years now and havent found any of what your on about. Its a very accurate easy to handle weapon. The mag change is smooth, even when prone. The balance is Ok and in close up areas and buildings its small length is a boon.
The latest models even come with a little bipod. Ok, lefties often have a bit of trouble and you do have to expose yourself a bit when firing round a left handside corner but the thing is a good rifle.
I fired the Steyr a while back and that seemed OK too.
Oh, and before I forget, one of the very best things about the SA80 is the sling. You wont believe how good that little thing is compared to other rifles.
-
Thomm, sorry if this sounds pedantic but if I don't point it out one of the Scotties here almost certainly will: Scotch is spelt Whisky. Irish and American is Whiskey.
Ah beat me to it!
-
On to the game.
I dont see a huge difference between the US Army and UK Army here (sans Javelin). In fact in a few tests the UK infantry actually seem to have a range and accuracy advantage when facing each other in comparible size. However, theres never as many of them, thats for sure.
In the main though, if your tactics were sound before, then theres no reason why they wont work now. Unless of course you used to rush everywhere in your Strykers, getting them blown up etc....
They dont stand up to the Marines though, who does with all those GLs!
Still, they do add a lot of fun and killing Syrians with the Brits isnt really any harder than with anyone else once youve learned what all the new stuff does and more importantly, what it cant do.
-
The current state of the British Army is a tough one. It's fielding a lot of equipment that is clearly past it's prime. Yet the cost of replacing the existing inventory is certainly something that Parliament is unprepared to approve of due to the larger economic picture.
Unlike the spend crazy Americans, they did NOT perform a major refitting of their forces in the 1980s and 1990s when economic times were much better. They have NOT spent tons of money to keep older vehicles up to modern standards nearly as much as the Americans. Yet clearly they recognized the need for this judging by various upgrade/replacement programs which have been repeatedly delayed due to funding limitations.
So the Brits are in a tough position now. They are clearly getting further and further behind, technologically, and yet the willingness to spend money hasn't been improving. It seems given the choice between suffering casualties or reducing combat commitments the indications are that getting out of combat situations is winning the day. Which is idiotically short sighted since the military forces won't spontaneously improve. At some point the money has to be put into new hardware or the military might as well be disbanded. Which, of course, is on the agenda of some of the radicals.
Steve
I think the UK has suffered from this neglect since about 1650, despite this we havent done too badly. I also think that if you took a snapshot in any decade since 1650 you would see the same problems and statements regarding equipment etc.
No one wants to pay for the military if they can get away with it and this includes all militaries. More than a few US projects have been abandoned and cancelled in the last few years and rather than being technologically left behind, we have been quite innovative at times. We were using the SUSAT for instance when the US was still using Iron sights on their M16's.
I have no idea what your on about when stating that we are trying to disengage from any conflicts? From this side of the pond I see no talk of this at the 'coal face'. In fact the UK has been involved in conflict every year since ww2, and have taken casualties in the vast majority of them. We were fighting terrorists when a lot of people in the US thought it was cool or nostalgic to support them.
I wont even begin to compare the quality of our armed forces against any other nations, but having worked with many other nations over the years I think we come out very near the top of the pile, if not on top.
In sum, yes we can do with a bit more money to buy shiney things and yes sometimes the politicians can be a pain, but its not all doom and gloom and our equipment is good in the main backed up by a very professional force that has high morale and is extremely effective in what it does.
-
Like a lot of guys out there I like to play humans while wargaming.
I just finished up a battle on the World at War (WaW) ladder and had forgotten about the WaW CMSF results calculator.
The calculator basically evens a few things out in the disparite battles by assigning points etc to casualties. The calculator is optional but as long as both players agree is used quite frequently and can sometimes significantly alter battle results from screen to ladder.
I just thought Id mention this here as we at WaW would welcome any new players and the calculator is a good option for those that dont like to mirror their games.
-
I had no idea Falklanders did all that. I should read up on this lost civilization.
Ah were that I was, but the defence of a people who tie 4 sheep to a lampost and call it a liesure centre is my main task right now. Only 2 months to go!
-
Bluidy cheapskate Fifers
HA HA! Coming from Harry Lauder Country I cant believe that any 'Tuechter' can comment on my frugality. I spent 14 years between Lossie and Kinloss and can confirm that Copper Wire may just have been invented by two 'Loons' fighting over a penny.....
However, I can neither confirm, nor deny your, accusation:)
-
Cheers for the quick replies guys, its now time to execute my cunning 'Bandwith appropriation' plan........
-
I have maybe found a way of D-loading this here (as being Scots I want to avoid a $20!!!! shipping charge), however I need to do it tomorrow and size may be a problem.
What size is it in Mb plse?
-
This is great to hear, it seemed the AI in QBs were as useless as tits on a bull.
Yes or tits on a fish! In most QBs the AI will just sit there until you find him.
However, this could be good news for those of us who enjoy H2H. More maps mean more variety. Of course you still have to work at it to avoid those stupid QB match ups I suppose?
-
For the British module, the hardgoods consist of a jewel case with CD inside. Think of it as a backup copy if you are too lazy to make one yourself (remember: downloads are limited to 365 days / 10 downloads, whichever comes first; we do not offer an infinite re-download period, digital locker etc.). There is no printed manual.
As I cant download it where I am, if I bought it how long would it take to ship to Europe?
-
Hunt down the laundry list of fixes and additions to the game stretching from patch v1.01 through 1.2. A full printed list would literally be as long as your arm. The bulk of those fixes/corrections were due to the dilligence of "fanbois who have never seen anything wrong".
The outer board does not know who lobbied for what, who complained the most, who pestered and wheedled, who fought the good fight, who made the cleverest suggestions or the most acute observations, who scoured the globe for reference material, who even bullied his fellows into stepping-up their game! There's 40-odd people credited at the back of the British module. Some have done heroic work for nine months straight - a couple even got paid a little for it. And I cannot recall one instance where grousing about how inferior the product is to some nostalgic memories of their beloved [add game title here] advanced the game an inch.
Ah I see your suffering from selective quoting syndrome, possibly coupled with the ever popular 'Not reading what I wrote' complex.
I dont need nor want a lecture about what anyone has done for me in this game. While it is very much appreciated what they have done to advance the game their motives, including yours are not all totaly altruistic.
To be blunt, the Beta testers wouldnt do it if they didnt want to, I assume that BFC didnt approach you all at gunpoint and MAKE you beta test? NO?
Then I reserve the right NOT to be talked down to by anyone on this board because of their perceived superiority to me due to thier involvement in a game. I didnt say every Fanboi was a Beta tester and I didnt say every moaner was anti-CMSF.
Cheers for hopefully reading the whole post.
-
Fortunately we have fought over Normandy in soooo many wargames (personally, CM:BO, EYSA, CC5) that this won't happen ...
Best regards,
Thomm
theres a lot of new guys here that havent played CM-1 games. Which is good, and so it may be a little shock for them.
-
I think the CMSF is best tactical game ever, and Soldier`s behavior is Realistic.
I would strongly agree that CMSF is the best modern tactical wargame on the market right now.
I would also strongly disagree that soldiers behaviour is 'realistic' and have no idea what experience this is based on.
However, I would also agree with your conclusion that the soldiers do 'go to ground' a bit too much when standing or kneeling would allow for better spotting. But to alleviate this for now, you can try getting them to crawl forwards a wee bit at a time. Situation dependent of course.
This has been said for some time now.
Next release: Nato-Modul!
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
I dont have anything against Beta testers, just general rudeness or haughtiness occassionaly makes me smile.
Anyway, I actually managed to find the quote
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=86689&highlight=Normandy+2009&page=4