dan/california

There are two separate endurance issues that need to be broken out in this discussion. The first is the ability to maintain absolutely maximum output. As previously commented this is mostly genetic. It can be improved slightly by training and of course is affected by load, including body weight, but it is a fundamentally fixed nuimber. The second and in many ways more important issue though is the ability to operate at relatively high sub maximal levels. This is enormously affected by proper training, nutrition and hydration. Also, over time the percentage of the relatively rigid all out max that can be sustained increases as well. So a well trained, elite, and very fit soldier might only be able to exceed the sprint performance of a less well trained one by only ten or twenty percent. However, the ground the elite trooper could cover in an eight or twenty four hour emergency road march might be two or three times a much. In games terms the primary question is how should performing hunt and quick movement orders be assessed. Fast, by definition, is full up max effort and subject to the above limitations. I do feel that fit/elite troops wear out too fast performing hunt and quick orders. If nothing else they would simply slow down to a pace that they could maintain instead of winding themselves completely. Hunt and Quick imply that the troopers are to arrive capable of further action. The AI should account for this.

Things rarely get un(*^*%*% halfway through,I feel your pain.

They could make it a module for this game, for Shock Force, or its own standalone product. It just seems like enough of the work has been done already to make it a viable project.

So, now that we have a Soviet Afghan module, can we get a U.S. Afpak module? All it would take is some TO&E ands scenario writing. Well, and drones, but I really want drones!

Run as admin did the trick. Thanks for the prompt response. BFC has the best customer service in the computer gaming industry, at least in my experience.

I am trying to get combat mission to run on my new Windows Seven laptop. It's the 64-bit version. I have installed the game according to currently published instructions twice, including both modules. The game loads normally, reads as version 1.21, and battles play normally. The problem starts when I save the second battle of a campaign. I save the game, go back to the menu screen, and when I try to open the saved game tab in the menu screen the game locks up completely. It doesn't do this until I have tried to save the second battle of a campaign. As long as I only play individual battles or the first battle of the campaign everything seems to work perfectly. But as soon as I save the second battle of the campaign it somehow corrupts the whole save game folder, and I can't even get it to open the save game selection window.

Poor Moon. He is still trying to get people to read the manual. Unfortunately, he has about as much chance as the poor guy in that myth did of finishing the stables.

The army just announced it is staying with DU for the next generation of penetrators. They cite a continuing performance advantage and toxicity problems with tungsten that are not a lot better than DU. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/12/army-again-turns-to-depleted-uranium-for-new-weaponry/#more-20408

DU emits small quantities of ionizing radiation as several people have noted. The quantity however is quite small and essentially harmless. Remember the thing that DU has been depleted of is the more radioactive isotope of uranium. DU is basically a byproduct of producing nuclear fuel. The chemical toxicity effects of inhaling small particles, however, are quite significant and in no way healthy. Most of the debate though is somewhat silly, the goal of war is to convince the other side that sitting down and shutting up is a better course of action than being a pain the &^^&$#. Nasty pyrophoric effects are good at that, all the other issues are secondary. If you don't want DU particles in the water, don't make a U.S. armored division pay you a visit.

I have been paying a LOT since 1.21 came out, and really my only complaint is that the scenario designers keep making look like an idiot. While there are certainly lots of features I would like to have yet, the remaining bugs are microscopic. I can play for forever with complete immersion. Just ask my wife.

We are talking about Iraqis and Ukrainians here, there is a kickback hidden in that deal somewhere that would level a Clydesdale. I'd bet the farm on it, well, if I had a farm.....

Take the estimate, triple it, add even more time if the project fells "hard". Repeat after every new roadblock comes up. It saves a great deal of disappointment and high blood pressure.

It is apparently becoming possible to do general calculations on graphics cards, with dozens of parallel cores. Will that help things like LOS calculations as much as I think it will when it finally trickles all the way down to the CM world?

I have noticed that 25mm from Bradleys does it on the first burst every time, though. I have scratched my head a time or two about how much 50 cal it can take though.....

Unfortunately it is my understanding that we won't see multiple players per side for quite a while, certainly not in CMSF1, and maybe not in Normandy either. I would love to be wrong though!

Couldn't we just tell the Gurkas that they can have the joint, lock, stock, barrel? As a reward for long and excellent service to the British Empire of course. We could even throw in some air support and free ammo, just to sweeten the deal.

In an ideal world these things never get within a couple of clicks of an enemy afv. The optics have a range of 10 or 15 kilometers depending on atmospheric conditions.

When Charles finally gets the multiple player per side code hashed out for CMSF you will be able to experience the "joys" of misunderstood orders and badly timed supporting fires in CMSF, as well.

That whistling sound is this thread falling off of a cliff.!

I know it seems like the aiming is taking forever when there is a turret tracking around the crews direction.

Really, anything that makes it easier to write scenarios is perhaps the biggest bump they could give ShockForce in terms of longevity.

One more thing, Air Support! If I have air assets available I routinely call them in on objective buildings immediately. It is much easier to suppress the rubble later.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091106102658.htm This might be highly relevant to the engine going forward, or not.

I'm starting to think that 1.21 is going to appear with the NATO module; which is fine if thats really soon.

Do it, maybe. Hit something, besides the odd overflying goose, I have doubts.