GSX

Im sorry but this just isnt so, there are many examples of cost effective military procurements. From new uniforms to ammo to rations. It may be that often the procurement cycle for some things can be costly but in the main in my experience we always want value for money, or lowest bidder wins. Thats not to say that major projects are not total FUBAR, I only have to think Nimrod AWACS there....

Now that my friend is a fallacy of major proportions that I would have to write a novel to dispel. If you know anything about the conflict in ireland then you would know that your statement is wrong. Consider this. The British Forces entered NI initially to protect the catholic population. One documented incident was of a woman giving sandwiches to the troops....... filled with razor blades. When I was there in the 80s and 90s people would give us bottles of spirits at New Year. God bless you they would say - but we poured them down the sink to avoid being poisoned. So please dont think that a British member of the armed forces would have automatically treated someone as dirt. This thread should really be closed as just like discussions about God or creation everyone is stuck in their own mindset and is unlikely to be moved by any argument. In truth, both Israel and Hamas are wrong, one for supposing they can fire rockets and get away with it and the other for supposing that the Holocaust justifies any and every means of action.

Er, going hull down isnt hard. Position your vehicle below where you want it to be (the berm) and then hunt it to the top. In this scenario it will definitely stop hull down. You can almost win this one without de-bussing any infantry, although you have more fun doing the real thing. As I have played this campaign under almost every patch I have to say that it has always turned out the same. If your given an hour plus to complete a mission, then, take your time. In reality, it may take 6 hours, so use your heavy weapons and conserve your fleshy ones.

I honestly wouldnt want it as any kind of priority. The look simply does not affect the gameplay, so what if a German NCO looks like a German Rifleman, I can imagine hes called Franz Lutz and comes from Magdeberg and is carrying photos of his kids all in my head. Much better to concentrate on the aspects of battle than mere asthetics. Im all for good graphics but not at any cost.

I put 2 Tanks hull down on the berm slopes, not on top. No matter what version, the result has always been the same, dead Syrians. I havent noticed any fixation on the Bunkers. The other two Tanks race for the gap and sit on the highway for about 5 minutes pounding anything that moves, or is seen. Then, once the berm tanks have completed their work (possibly another 5 mins) they join the other 2 in the road. Basically, the 4 tanks win this one. I wont spoil it for anyone but my Strykers probably dont move to drop of the Inf for a while yet and then I dont go through the front door. I end up unloading a platoon on the main objective and then doing some snazy top floor to bottom floor house clearing through the complex. If I have time, the tanks then enter from the rear of the bunkers and do some major rolling up supported by an MGS or two and a few empty Strykers.

Im sure thatthere will be that variety of german Camo. CMBO had it, especially when guys modded it. Im not too bothered about height and build, that doesnt add to a wargame for me. CM Normandy should be about the US Vs the Germans for about 90 days, the same time period we have in SF now. For the vast majority of that time the US faced the German Army and Fallshirmaeger, so we should see German Paras and whatever Army uniforms they used then. Im not exactly shure that the German Army went totally for Camo rather than variations on Grey, remain to be corrected though. Certainly for the latter period of the Normandy battle the US would have faced some SS units and so we should see some SS camo patters there. Again the modders out there and scenario designers can take us to other fronts and other battles which would very much involve different camos.

Word on the street is that the Harrier is being phased out of combat for now. Maybe even being retired is a strong rumour. In fact some senior naval officer has actually resigned over these plans. On a simialar vein, the typhoon isnt yet dropping ordnance for real and still has a while to go to do so. This leaves the Tornado GR4 as the sole ground support weapon from about Apr 09.

It would be useful if you were on the assault with an OMG in Germany in 1992! Its a case of something that exists for one reason being coded as another thing (offensive smoke being treated as defensive as mentioned above). The Soviets doctrine was offensive and so all of their energies were put into that medium.

This one is good for the sound and a quick tip on how to make a smokescreen. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xBtwSoyW2eo&feature=related

The look of the men is a definite interest for me. Im not expecting them too look as individual as they actually are on Ops, often no jacket is worn under the Body Armour for example, just a tee shirt. However I would expect them to look representative of a Brit soldier, hopefully with PRR etc. We shall see soon I suppose.

I disagree. Formations are what makes a military feel right. Tanks come in platoons with a leader. Id love to be able to set realistic formations for my troops and armour.

Its not all that often that a military Sim makes a popular wargame, too many things that the military want, the public doesnt.

Couldnt agree more, doctrine drives tactics. The mere lack of platoon formations breaks it for me as a viable training tool right now, and there are a lot of other methods of training that work too.

Whose average training? The US I suppose. What about UK Marines then, have the toughest basic training of any infantry unit in the world. Add to that a fair bit of combat experience and they in the elite box all the time. Even most of the UK Army will almost certainly be crack under that definition. The Brit module should be interesting then.

Your not, your going to go out and train for warfare, do the drills, get to know your men, get fit etc. At the Platoon level soldering is about the act. I understand where your coming from but I think that SF is not the right training aid right now for anything other than the basics..... however, if it did have Coplay its would be a much better tool for individual force commanders I totally agree there. Argument over for me I think.

The position Ive taken is merely from experience, the same experience Im sure that a lot of those military guys that you talk about have taken. I can see why a classroom exercise using CM may be beneficial to junior leaders and even perhaps the squaddies. But at that level its usually a lot better to get on the ground and carry out your basic infantry drills, learn your trade and do the stuff that makes you a better soldier. Now if all the things you allude to were in it, it would be a better experience, Tankers can control tanks and infantry can control infantry. So we seem to be discussing two separate things right now, one is the current SF and the other is an ideal SF with CoPlay etc. Im sure Im just a dinosaur and the truth lies somewhere inbetween.

I will get the brit Mod for the new skins but am under no illusions that doing the same stuff as I do with the US Army will get exactly the same results. Brits use almost the same weaponry as the US, have similar sized squads etc, vehicles though different equate to roughly the same. Perhaps the Challenger will be better than the Abrahams? It does have a better cross country capability and better armour, but the exact details are classified. Perhaps thats an inherint problem with trying to model modern warfare, it a lot of gueswork as Im sure the various militaries arent going to tell BF all of their secrets...

I still think that as it stand right now SF doesnt really enhance the training of the units that Sf is focused on, thats basically platoon combat. I get it that you can play the game in different terrain (desert) form where your unit may be stationed. But the bottom line is that if your guys can do the basics in 12 foot of snow well, then they are going to be just as good in a flat Desert or other type of terrain. If you already train in the harshest conditions and do the basics well, then your going to find it easier when you get to the less difficult terrain. Plus before you deploy you will get more specific training tailored to the role that you will carry out. As it stands right now SF wont really teach you much about combined arms co-operation. Im not saying that it cant or wont in the future, just that right now it does not provide more than a basic framework. For starters it may have 1-1 graphic representation but it does not have 1-1 control over the infantry, which means individual soldiers seem to be treated just the same as CM-1, except I can see them.

Sorry I realised what I was saying was pretty much what you stated there before you stated it, you were too quick!

Actually, theres a couple of things wrong with your statement there. 1. Things that were in CM-1 seem to have been put back in. The use of the spacebar to bring up unit options was the old right click in CM-1 brought into CM-2 when guys asked for a similar thing. As has WEGO and the Blue Bar recent additions. 2. Perhaps if they had taken the time to code it up as you say and it was released next week, it wouldn't have been the initial flop and failure that it was when it was released in beta form last year. Still its good enough to play now though.

Are you honestly saying that the reason a tank cannot cross a 3 foot wall is that they cant afford to code it in?

Double post.

Apart from the Blue Vs Blue I honestly dont think any new Mod will bring anything new to the gameplay (voices and vehicles aside). Im sure a UK platoon will just be a US platoon with new skins. Although the Marines did bring in some new aspects with Trucks and Amphibs and bigger squads. But the core gameplay will remain the same as it did from the Army to the Marines. Perhaps the UK will have onboard mortars? Not that this is necessarily a bad thing though as I plan my next tournament in SF to be between the US and Brits. I will have to think of a pretty extreme Sci Fi situation for it to take place in the ME but it should be fun though!

Aha! Yes thats it. Thanks guys I shall try this method didnt realise I had to deselect the unit first.

ASL Veteran. I hear you there.... I remember running about in Germany too back in the 80's and early 90's. Ah the good old days, when you knew your enemy and trained for Armageddon! But I digress. I actually agree with what your saying except that if you gave CM to some squaddies they probably would benefit from it. I also fully understand that US and UK infantry training and ethos is very different (ive served for almost 10 of my 25 years with US forces in various places). And its not different in the Uk, we are actually more limited than you are for large exercises (for big ones we go to BATUS in Canada). My whole point is and was that SF as it is right now wouldnt be a training tool worth investing money in as it doesnt actually do anything other than highlight the basics. And you can do those basics in a football field if you want. Why waste any time indoors when your guys can run around getting fit doing them? I wholeheartedy agree that higher commander can do the thinking stuff in a coplay situation, get a tanker to command the tanks and a JTAC to do air etc. But SF doesnt have coplay so its a rather moot point.