GSX
-
Posts
938 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by GSX
-
-
Man, Ive just read through this whole thread fest. Ive come to the conclusion that Im going to be disappointed with a lot of CM Normandy.
So the yanks will be able to see all of the Nazi entrenchments. No big deal!
However, its pretty fundamental to a Nazi defender not to have his positions shown to the enemy before the battle starts.
The US historically took a lot of horrendous casualties in Normandy, especially in the Bocage, through hidden Nazi positions, now of course we are going to be told that air recce has sourced all of these!
Ive been to Normandy a few times, most recently in March 2008, and I can tell you, in the surviving bits of the Bocage, you cant see **** from ground level at 100 yards, never mind air recce.
CM Normandy is all about the US versus dug in German regular infantry, I dont think the US even faced the SS for months, or ever saw a Tiger for ages too.
Unless BFC is planning a revisionist Normandy where the US faces the SS and Tigers in open terrain, where in reality the UK faced all the SS and most of the Tigers for most of the time, its all about small unit actions with a few tanks in very much closed terrain with hidden foxholes and trenches.
The Germans were good, but not that good and the hidden defences gave them an edge that they wont have now.
Still, its a game, not a simulation I suppose.
-
I don't know, what is it about SF that find RTS-ee(?). I've never played an RTS that even remotely resembled SF.
Ah, maybe real time tactical then, not strategy. Sf is a cracking RT game when played at the lower scales, Platoon+. Maybe even company if the map is the right size.
It could do with some things that RT games have. Any of the following:
An automatic jump to an engaged unit, Ive seen that in RTS. It would get round the problem that you may be concentrating in one area and forget whats going on in others.
An overall strategic campaign map for the campaign where you can choose which branch youd like to follow on the scenario tree.
Assigning a number to a task group on larger maps. This would allow you to move a group of vehicles and Inf around to contact, say a couple of platoons and a few vehicles in each group.
A minimap showing the disposition of your forces which you can click on to jump to a platoon etc, this would aide your overall sight picture as a battlefield commander. This minimap exists now if you zoom out far enogh, so why not have it reproduced for RT games.
A true Mouse heavy management, clicking a unit or group of units brings up options for movement and fire etc.
Just some thoughts though...
-
Whilst the guy hasn't really done his research (13 man platoon etc) he has a few perfectly valid points. For one, the UI needs tweaking for the mainstream player to make it easier to control all those units. Modifier buttons (hold down "this" when double-clicking a unit and it selects only the men, hold down "this" and it selects only the vehicles) and group assignments (Control plus 1 makes all selected units part of "group 1") etc. are standard and helpful UI features these days and people expect them to be there. I think when BFC decided to go RT they should have basically copied all these bits feature for feature straight from a good RTS and not be so proud ("we don't make RTSs, we make strategy games"). If a feature has some merit, use it.
Agree with the above.
CMSF is a fun game, has some good things, some bad, its not perfect, but what game has ever been.
As long as you approach it as a game and dont try to think of it as a true simulation, you will enjoy it for the most part.
I think the review was fair and balanced. What you have to remember is that it wasnt a review aimed at those of us who have Cmed for years by a CM Grog. So given this, I dont think you can knock it. SF feels and plays like it was designed for RTS, so why not give it a more RTS like interface? His idea about grouping units may not be all that bad in certain circumstances.
-
Do we know what units will be in CM-N, Im assuming here that like SF, there will be a core unit, Ard inf or such like, supported by various units. Then we may get a Para Module or mortain Module etc?
I like using the actual names etc, would be a good addition.
-
Whether you can them terrain or not, for WW2 you have to bring back trenches with FO like you have in CMBB and CMAK.
In 2007 you can assume that a UAV spotted the trenches or something, but in Normandy that would be a joke.
As Steve has already said this aint going to be happening in CM-N I think its going to have to be something were all going to have to deal with.
Ah well, as long as the animations look good I can suspend disbelief.
How come CM-1 had stuff you couldnt see until you got up to it?
-
Bayonet training is used to focus aggression. I served with the Gurkhas once, same with their Kukri, it focuses their mind. Oooh, can we have a Gurkha Mod? Small Nepalese blokes who like to gamble and make the best curries youll ever taste!
I remember one guy an ex Gurkha in Hereford in the 80's, he had a great curry house, youd fall out of the crystal Rooms and head straight there to have your head blown off!
-
Except when some numbnuts says something unhelpful like "Over there, by the tree". Which tree, idiot. I can't see you, I don't know where you are with any degree of accuracy, I don't know which way you're facing, and we're in a forest.
And except when everyone suddenly gets either overly loquacious and jams the net, or everyone suddenly clams up.
Neither of those exceptions are particularly exceptional.
It's great for battery deployments though. Makes then un-nervingly quiet.
Hmm, but the whole point of training, retraining and yet more training is to discourage Mr numbnuts from doing this. Its banged into you day in day out that you have to give a proper report.
You give a target indication that everyone understands.
As in, enemy half left of point A, theres 3 of them moving left to right etc etc.
Using a PRR means sticking to the same radio discipline as you would normally. Is not on open transmit, you have to push the button. Even the most stupid soldier knows his section commander will give him a rolliking for simply blarting over the waves. And in combat, everyone's arse is on the line.
Actually, if your in a forest in CMSF, then your in the Poo!
I dont think that highly disciplined and very well trained infantry are going to forget years of training. I cant imagine UK soldiers being so indiciplined, nor US for that matter. -
500m is pushing it, and it is VERY line-of-sight.
Ive used it through buildings, but your right 500m is pushing it, 2-300 is Ok. But in normal operation it makes life so much easier. No going hoarse through shouting and instant Borg spotting though, when one of your guys sees something you get it instantly.
No matter, its still a big advantage to any infantry unit. It enhances already excellent unit cohesion for Brit soldiers.
-
Paratroopers...
Yes, but how can you tell? I initially thought marines, they have a certain reputation here.....
-
Mind you, Im not sure I like the upcoming Brit Gay Mod.....
Maybe there should be a trousers optional button and we can forget the bloused or non bloused argument?
-
Oh. You do want an engine change. make ur mind up
I suppose if it modelled reality more and reflected reality more, then yes I would like the PRR reflected in the engine, as to the mechanics of how to do it, I havent a clue. But if it can be done I think it should be.
These are real soldiers too....
-
Had no idea the British had staged a successful bayonet attack post Falklands. Am most unhappy this story rated only a paragraph. For starters, at those odds, with bullets flying, who thought this was a good idea? Was it day or night? In what sort of positions were the ambushers? Terrain? Reporter needs a remedial military reporting class soonest!
Regards,
John Kettler
John, heres a bit more meat o flesh out the story.
WITH BAYONETS ATTACHED, THEY FINISHED OFF THE ENEMY WHO HAD NOT RUN AWAY.. May 21 2004SCOTS TELL OF CHARGE
By Keith Mcleod And Michael Christie
SCOTS soldiers last night told how they launched a bayonet charge on Iraqi militiamen after hours of battle.
An Army insider last night gave the Record an insight into the bravery of the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders.
They were forced to use 'cold steel' as supplies of ammunition ran low.
Many of the militiamen turned and fled but the close-quarters fighting left around 20 rebels dead.
Thirty-five of Shia Moslem cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's followers died and two British troops were injured during the three-hour battle.
A senior Argylls officer said last night: 'After a fierce fight and with small amounts of ammo left, they put in a conventional left-flanking attack.
'With bayonets attached, they finished off the enemy who had not run off.'
It was the first time in 22 years the Army had used bayonets in action.
The last came when the Scots Guards stormed Argentinian positions during the Falklands War.
The battle developed following a distress call from a group of eight British soldiers last Friday.
The troops under the command of Major Adam Griffiths were surrounded on the notorious Route Six highway while en route to Camp Abu Naji in southern Iraq. Their LandRovers were riddled with bullets and they came under attack from rocket launchers and grenades.
But as a 30-strong platoon of Argylls responded to the SOS, the militia were getting reinforcements.
The men from the Stirlingshire-based regiment were forced to dig in and shoot back.
The Argylls were aided by a detachment of the Princess of Wales' Royal Regiment, who arrived at the scene in armoured Warrior vehicles.
More than 150 Iraqis were said to be involved in last week's battle. Military sources say the militiamen miscalculated the response from the original group of soldiers.
Last night, a source said: 'Morale is very good following this serious incident.
'The insurgents have been laying ambushes on Route Six one of the main roads between Basra and Baghdad for some time.
'Previously, the response from small British groups has been drive on. These militiamen were obviously expecting this to happen again.
'The enemy have been picking their targets, mainly two LandRovers with six to eight soldiers on board. With those odds, it is sometimes best to keep on going, but the attack was so sustained, the LandRovers stopped and returned fire.
'We now hope that these attacks on Route Six will stop, but we are taking nothing for granted.'
Intelligence gathered since the bayonet charge suggests it shocked the militia fighters, who expected the outnumbered Scots to flee.
The source added: 'The injuries received by our troops were shrapnel to the hand and shrapnel to the groin. Both of these casualties were as a result of rocket-propelled grenades fired at them.
'Both the injured guys are back with their units and doing fine.'
The Princess of Wales' Royal Regiment arrived on the scene in 37ton Warriors just as the Scots' ammo was getting low.
They found many Iraqi militia fleeing the bayonet charge.
Around 20 Iraqis who chose to stand and fight were killed by the troops of both regiments.
The Argylls' forebears formed The Thin Red Line which kept 25,000 Russians at bay at Balaclava during the Crimean War of the 1850s.
In 1967, Argylls commander Lieutenant-Colonel Colin Mitchell known as Mad Mitch stormed a rebel stronghold in Yemen.
Accompanied only by 15 pipers playing Scotland The Brave, he recaptured Crater Town, the commercial heart of Aden, which had been in enemy hands for two weeks.
The regiment has won 16 Victoria Crosses.
-
I've read plenty of stories about the brits in afghanistan. They undergoing some pretty tough fights every day, real up close and personal battles.
Seems like nothing really changes then
-
The PRR is an easy fix.
That is a PRR right?
Now graphically thats good, I like it. But mechanically? I think soldiers using it would automatically get some sort of combat bonus as it makes them that much more efficient soldiers. This is what the Brits say about it:
As for graphics, well heres a shot of what could beThe Personal Role Radio (PRR) is a small transmitter-receiver that allows infantry soldiers to communicate over short distances.Effective even through thick cover or the walls of buildings, PRR enables section commanders to react quickly, aggressively and efficiently to rapidly changing situations, including contact with the enemy, greatly increasing the effectiveness of infantry fire teams. PRR is issued to every member of an eight-strong infantry section.
Notice the trousers!!!!
-
Back to my last question, which hasnt been answered by anyone who knows.
Anyway, Im not sure SF can model a much looser infantry formation, as I understand it right now, and correct me if Im a Biff here, we have 1-1 soldier representation, but not 1-1 soldier modelling in space. So no amount of PRR and aids to better infantry communication in the noise and heat of battle is going to change that.Perhaps using the PRR would make them more efficient soldiers, increase their relative skill level? After all, squad ncos wont be shouting vague commands over the din, they would be speaking clear commands over their PRR.
Im curious if this COULD be done with the engine/game/whatever? Could the addition of the PRR automatically increase the command/efficiency/combat ability of the unit using it? After all, it does appear to do so in real life.
-
I never thought Id spark a huge discussion on how to wear your trousers, however. The elastic bungees are optional and many wear them, but when standing up you generally pull the elastic down to the foot. 2 seconds running around and bending your knees causes the elastic to ride up.
No big deal though but its definitely not tucked into a boot and half way up the leg. A tiny touch of realism adds to a game, just as the PRR would.
What about the Minimi? I can only remember us having the Para version and not the one with a stock. Again, not that it makes a whole lot of difference.
Again, the UK javelin is different and comes with a Tripod and has a more effective sight system too.
-
Not sure an LAV would last long with crazy fedayeen barking at the back door... In SF that is, not RL.
Honestly, I have had Humvees that do better than LAVs, come to think of it, in one scenario my Trucks did better. No kidding...... its a bullet magnet....... Still its a looker....
-
Oh, ok then. Just eye candy.
No offence meant here, but isnt shades on a Marine in a night mission bloody eye candy too?
I actually thought that was one of the big leaps forward in the CM-2 games, eye candy and all?
Anyway, Im not sure SF can model a much looser infantry formation, as I understand it roght now, and correct me if Im a Biff here, we have 1-1 soldier representation, but not 1-1 soldier modelling in space. So no amount of PRR and aids to better infantry communication in the noise and heat of battle is going to change that.
Perhaps using the PRR would make them more efficient soldiers, increase their relative skill level? After all, squad ncos wont be shouting vague commands over the din, they would be speaking clear commands over their PRR.
Just a thought. If the Marines use something similar, then that should be modelled too....... Much more convincing then shades at night!!!
-
What do see PRR bringing to the table that isn't in CMSF already - what would "model[ing] [PRR] accurately" look like to you, that is distinctly different to what we already have?
Or were you talking about the British penchant for wearing berets?
Well for starters they should maybe be wearing them. No Berets though, not in combat.
Perhaps a PRR would enable the Squad to be more spread out? 1.10 seems to have improved the 'lets all run in a gaggle' mode, but its still unrealistic to see a 13 man Marine squad hang around a door waiting to get in a building.
Anyway, Im sure if they can stick shades on marines they can slap a PRR on some Suaddies.
Anyway thats not a Beret, this is!
-
Bloody hell, nice resource! As an aside, I'd heard of "Operation TELIC" but had assumed it was some sort of sweep against insurgents after the war rather than the invasion itself. Obviously I was wrong.
TELIC is the Iraq Op, HERRICK the Afghan Op. There are a few others than encompass the war on terror etc.
Back to the Brit Module, is BF going to be able to model this accurately?
-
Im easy, so my friends say........
BFC, what I want from my Brit Module is simple:
1. No stupid cockney accents. We dont all sound like that, get some regional accents.
2. Deliberate fire - yes. we Brits dont spray and pray. Deliberate fire means that, aimed shots at distance, auto possibly for the assault. Brit marksmanship tradition still continues and the L85 is a very accurate weapon.
3. Maybe insignificant, but paramount, Brit soldiers DO NOT tuck their trousers (pants if your US) into their boots. We like to have them round our ankles.
Ive seen the vehicles and they look good, so follow my advice and youve got a sale.
-
No mate, thats exactly what I thought too, so I clicked through every single unit and the only two able to see the marines vehicles are the two empty UAZ.
-
GSX,
I'm assuming you meant to say "I can't understand..."? In any case, I do post on the Forums a few hours every day. If I posted any more, do you really think that would be in everybody's best interests long term? I mean, you do understand that if I'm here posting I'm not doing things like writing up a design proposal to Charles on how we can make Campaign development smoother in the future, right? And that if Charles, even hour spent here translates directly into one hour of delay for the next patch, which means an hour delay for the next release, and the release after that, and after that, etc. That's part of why he doesn't so much as read the posts here. The other reason is that he gets way, way too mad when he sees some of the poor attitudes. We revoked his posting privileges ages ago because he wasn't as nice as me
Steve
No I actually meant I can understand...... As in your time should mainly be spent doing what you need to do to get things right, thats not to say you cant spend a couple of minutes explaining some major things ---- see my previous post.
-
GSX,
Because some have, in very direct terms, blamed the testers for issues with the game. And by "blame" I mean ridiculed and called childish names. The fact that the people saying these things aren't fit to lick their boots (i.e. I'd never have them as a tester even if they sent me a $1000 bribe) just adds insult to injury. There's nothing more frustrating than to be called out by someone who doesn't have a clue. I know, because for 10 years now I've had it happen to me just about every day
Lucky for us 99% of the BS rolls off our backs, otherwise we'd close up shop and do something else less sadomasochistic.I'm assuming you meant to say "I can't understand..."? In any case, I do post on the Forums a few hours every day. If I posted any more, do you really think that would be in everybody's best interests long term? I mean, you do understand that if I'm here posting I'm not doing things like writing up a design proposal to Charles on how we can make Campaign development smoother in the future, right? And that if Charles, even hour spent here translates directly into one hour of delay for the next patch, which means an hour delay for the next release, and the release after that, and after that, etc. That's part of why he doesn't so much as read the posts here. The other reason is that he gets way, way too mad when he sees some of the poor attitudes. We revoked his posting privileges ages ago because he wasn't as nice as me
I'm glad to hear you were having fun with it and sorry that fun had to be put on hold for a bit. We are working hard to get the kinks worked out and there should be a result soon. JonS, in particular, deserves a couple of fiths of good Scotch for his efforts
Steve
In no way am I blaming a non paid tester for anything that goes wrong with a game. They give their free time and efforts to test the features before I get to it. Kudos to them all.
What often frustrates me personally, and frustrate may not be even the right term here, niggles maybe more apt, is that the I have to go find out information from a MB on a missing feature or major bug that is detrimental to the game I am playing.
It would be nice and appreciated for the major things to be highlighted in a sticky thread. I consider a broken campaign to be a major thing. I dont consider the bug I get when looking at a squad and one of them is a crewman all that major as it does not detract from gameplay, so I wouldnt expect it to be highlighted.
A simple statement that the Marines Campaign cant be finished but were working on it is better than finding out by roundabout means. I appreciate honesty, I try to be honest when making statements here. On the other hand I dont appreciate being ridiculed or written off because I have made my statements.
Your job (BFC) is to make games and I understand that you dont necessarily want anyone to be put off your games by negative comments. My cover up statement wasnt meant to mean it was deliberately covered up, it merely stated that the perception out there was that it looked like another cover up job.
I reiterate that I am enjoying the Marines module and SF in general, but all through this last 14 months or so I have continually come up against something that makes the game difficult to play. I also fully comprehend that unlike other companies that may put out 1 patch and move onto something else you have been constantly working on the game. The very size of your outfit means that you couldnt afford to do that anyway.
However, for the $25 that I paid you for this game one of the main features cannot be used, the Campaign. So as it stands right now I got a few vehicles and bigger infantry squads for my money as I could have gotten every other improvement by simply upgrading to 1.10.
In sum, your job is making games, my hobby is playing them, as long as the two keep meeting, then were both happy. A bit of honest information now and then goes a long way to help I think.
Cheers
I dont think that highly disciplined and very well trained infantry are going to forget years of training. I cant imagine UK soldiers being so indiciplined, nor US for that matter.
CMSF Marines review up at IGN
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
No fantasy view here, I think SF looks way better than CM-1, but the original still plays better and feels better right now. Yes, different theatre of war and differing premise, but the reality remains that CM-1 is still a more immersive game.
I know, its like comparing apples and beans but SF has no longevity, already the pace of technology is passing it by, whereas ww2 is set in stone technology wise.