molotov_billy

Use the Rezpack tool first For more information,read the Mod Tools Readme </font>

we're waiting... *taps foot* Seriously though, maybe I'm the only one, but sounds make a big difference to my experience. These sound mods have got me replaying through the campaign again. Thanks again

You might be fudging the tests a bit with this one - I believe that units concentrate their spotting ability in the area of their given fire arcs.

Definately sounds like more tests are necessary. As of 1.05, my M1's spotting isn't nearly as effective as infantry.

I know for sure that they said any code updates to a module would be a free addition for Shock Force. I don't know about the WW2 one, though - I don't think it's a module, but it's certainly on the same engine and shares code with CMSF.

Might be cool to see some additional improvements to MOUT for the module if it focuses on it in any way - stacking up at doors,etc

They're the same campaign. It's a mixup between Battlefront and Paradox.

That one does seem like a bit of a stretch. I can't say that I ever zoom into that level, does anybody else? Also - why worry about the fin when the launcher itself is inside his shoulder? That type of stuff just happens, not out of the ordinary for any RTS with relatively low-res character models.

They're developing it at the same time as the CMSF updates and the Marine module. The Marine module comes first, then WW2. I don't believe any hard dates have been posted.

I tend to agree. What I had in mind for a useful type of test might be something like the underslung grenade launcher compared to 5.56, from the same squad. It isn't a super articulate comparison, just one that might highlight a case where something is majorly wrong - with my hunch being that the 40mm underslung is so innaccurate and non-lethal that even in long, sustained firefights, it may be doing nothing at all. I think those type of tests would just be rough indicators for what types of things may need to be examined more closely.

Is there any ability within the engine to track data on what specific weapons have X number of kills? Might be really useful for finding which weapons could possibly be off the mark (if any.) For example - if in a 40 minute company sized firefight, if nobody is taking hits from the 40mm GL, you at least know that something needs to be adjusted. It's difficult to playtest that type of thing since it has to be tracked visually, and anything that looks like it's being hit by a GL would have just as likely been hit from the 5.56 that's being fired at the same time.

Yep. RPG's AT4's Sniper rifles ToW-2 Grenades Smokegrenades Javelins Tank Cannons Possibly ammo types. Click the weapon icon in your UI. Drag the attack line to your target. Click the target. The color of the line indicates if that specific soldier can see the enemy unit.

Seabea, I absolutely agree, good points. Where would a runner come from? How about telling a guy to run someplace X and grab ammo, etc. We have no abilities to do things without clunkily exposing the entire squad to detection and fire. I suppose you'd have to model the negative effects of moving individuals around in a "non-doctrinal" type of way. Do they lose communication? Does their morale absolutely plummet? Do they lose their way back to their squad? Pinned more easily?

Oddball, what is with the alternate weapon firing sounds? It seems like only one is played in game?

Or, if two publishers are manufacturing the same product, they should go through at least the minimal cooperation necessary to provide the customer with the same materials and data - to avoid confusion about which box will get update support quicker, which box has the 'real manual', or why some people have a campaign called "TF Lightning" while others have one called "TF Thunder", etc etc.

Adam, I think that this is technically correct, but does it ever actually happen? I mean, are there real-life examples that you know of where US infantry have reduced Iraqi structures to dust with small arms fire alone, even a single section of a building? The amount of time required, and the sheer amount of ammo required would seem to be absolutely enormous, levels that would never allow such a thing to happen in a real situation. I would admit that it's certainly possible, but I just don't know if it would ever apply to real combat or a video game for that matter?

I think it's also worthwhile to consider that a standing dummy doesn't necessarily represent a human seeking cover very well - if he's not interested in returning fire or observing (ie, he's pinned), he's going to be balled up in a corner, probably not next to an exterior wall. There are obviously also extra cover opportunities in a typical building - furniture, areas lower than ground level, etc. Now, once a person is interested in peeking out a window, or engaging targets outside of the building, his exposure would most certainly multiply. He's now standing next to an exterior wall in a position where enemy shooters would most likely concentrate their fire, and he's even exposing parts of his body to zero cover. [ January 06, 2008, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: molotov_billy ]

Don't believe so, not at this point. Even if you re-embark them while split, they will recombine in the bus.

Oddball, you might be able to get something from this, at the 30 second mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzURhzK_eZo

Cool mod, Oddball! Looking forward to your fixes. Do you have any sounds for the rifle grenade launcher firing? A very distinctive sound.. dont realy like the one that's in there. Anyway, thanks for the mod.

Has anybody had much luck in the 2nd mission? I tend to run *completely* out of ammo before I clear even a third of the city. 1 and 3 seem to be fine, very challenging. I beging to run out of ammo towards the end of 3, but if you conserve, it's not too much of a problem.

I'm sure there are trade-offs in either system. The only reason I mention it is because I've seen it in a couple of games and it seems to work really well. It can be used for a number of things - reinforcements arriving, notifiers for when support assets beging firing, when a unit runs out of ammo, etc. The red arrow thing may work just as well, or better. It's just a matter of putting it in a testing it out, tweaking until it's right. The only negative I can think of off the top of my head is that you'd have to be looking in the direction of the event to see it.

A clickable event list somewhere in the UI would be very useful - think Close Combat. Pretty often I'll find the little red bodies of my troops and not have any idea how it happened - especially in the larger scenarios where I have to watch two locations which are not close to eachother. It would be nice to be able to jump to the site of a casualty quickly, even if you couldn't rewind.

Wiggum - I think part of the issue is that they need to make the game playable for PBEM users. A 6 hour scenario becomes quite a beast if you play one minute at a time! Even the 2 hour stuff that you occasionaly see now - 120 turns? Have people been able to complete those? Personally, I don't play by email. It would be interesting to see longer scenarios and a feature that let's me speed up playback - like a flight simlator. 4x, 8x, etc - for when you're waiting on those airstrikes or whatever else.

On the subject, it would be nice to see the real name of the weapon that's represented by "Light", "Medium", and "Heavy" ordinance.