dan/california

I think they have overcomplicated their installer situation with the multiple versions from Paradox and Gamersgate. Hopefully with Normandy that can be avoided.

Any hope of seeing it before Monday now? Any hope of seeing it before next Friday?

If Steve says sometime next week, which he did right before Thanksgiving, he means the following Friday, maybe. If his guidance is any less specific than that just assume that it will be at least two more weeks. The good news is that he hasn't been posting much the past three days or so. This usually implies he is doing actual work instead of his usual round of mediating between Charles and the beta testers interspersed with occasional attitude corrections in the forum. The question of course is whether he is working on the patch, Normandy or one of BFC's many other ever heating irons. He could at least drop by long enough to tell me what a &^$&&*(* I am give us a crumb or two.

I think their rationale has more to do with the time to add a new system to the interface. However the British module says it includes MLRS, so either some version of this has gotten done for guided MLRS, or we are going to get the ability to more or less obliterate terrain a square kilometer at a time. I would point out that most scenario maps aren't that big and it is 1/16 of the theoretical maximum map size. And you need a top of the Alien rig to do much with one of those.

Think of it as a major expansion of the operation.

Check your private messages Herr Field Marshall.

It is not really all that complicated n terms of match ups. The Javelin, TOW, and Abrams main gun will kill anything on the field, usually in one shot. For the Syrians the T-90, ATGM-14 Kornet, and the RPG-29 are almost as effective. Virtually every missile and cannon round in the game can kill virtually every infantry fighting vehicle. ERA Bradleys and BMP-3s are sturdier, but not by much. The only place it gets iffy is lighter antitank weapons vs older Syrian tanks. If in doubt, hold out for a flank shot. The Stryker mounted 105mm is also a little iffy against MBTs, unfortunately for the Stryker anything its gun is iffy against will certainly kill it if lands a return shot, so be very careful. And remember the Abrams' armor is MUCH thinner on the sides and rear.

Maybe? Please? It gets more topical every day.

The compromise is not resulting in the exploding AFV I have in mind.

The Russians had a LOT more tubes in the Georgia fight. Quantity has a quality all its own. Also the Georgians did not have truly significant air assets. The U.S. wouldn't launch a ground war without near complete air superiority, which means 4 plus guns laid out in a nice tight formation would have limited life expectancy to put it mildly. I will also at least mention guided MLRS hooked up to counter battery radar. The Russians may have the toys and training to deal with some of these issues. The Syrians, not so much. And even in Georgia I kept looking at the footage thinking that a single squadron of fighters could end the entire Russian effort with one sortie's worth of SFW cluster bombs the way the Russian convoys were bunching up.

I am agreeing with the aim issue, seems like at anything beyond truly pointblank range it would be that much harder to hold the weapon in line for the main round. .2 to .4 seconds is a significant amount of time for the muzzle to wander around.

I have this problem repeatedly, some AI to get the rocket launcher where it needs to be would be greatly appreciated.

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/11/afghanistans_korengal_valley.html

Any hints on timing or content for 1.11? Maybe, please?

The good news is that they have already said that pathfinding is one of the primary areas of focus for the patch. I am hopeful that it will be AT LEAST as good as 1.08, and perhaps substantially better.

This is true, but that response time difference is very important. A marine FO can get mortars on target in 2 minutes. It is almost as good as direct fire.

It has worked great for me once i got the password in. I am seeing at least 100kb/sec download speeds.

I demand that this capability be simulated in the British Module. It is of paramount importance, no really!

Moon, this can be filed under "No good deed goes unpunished".

But it only marks that square, I am arguing that they should be able to mark the entire field.

Can we have drones with that? Please? And some mine clearing, detecting functionality from engineers? So at least once a mine field gets found the hard way there is some ability to check/clear the immediate area? I would settle for checked and marked. Can't be accused of asking for only part of the pie can I?

A lot of this can be addressed through scenario design. It is perfectly possible to lay out a web of buildings where the doors are set up to make getting around without being seen possible.

Abrams, Model M1.

Amazing work, can't wait.

I think he means twice the distance from the Earth to the Sun, unless there is a military version of that abbreviation.