dan/california

We may conclusively consider ourselves off track.

Trust me, my opinions on how much "credibility" the western world should have in places like Somalia are seriously "politically incorrect". Seanachai Said it perfectly, people who are contributing to the food chain thirty fathoms down cause very few problems, ever.

Navies aren't useless at all if used correctly, simply establish a shipping lane as far from the Somali coast as the local ocean bottom allows. Or midway between the Somali and Yemeni coast. Whichever you hit first. Then simply allow target practice for any NATO ship directed at any small boat in the lane. Don't blink when the pirates arrange for some dead women and children. One month, fifty or a hundred sunken boats, and no more problems. Blanket the Somali coast with air dropped leaflets of the area where fishing is about to become extremely unsafe if you feel you must. If we allow this to be profitable in local terms it WILL continue.

Face and target arc with short move orders back and forth to try to get them to right window. They would get a ? icon, but that is not that helpful for a heat round against armor. If you could give a target order on a ? icon and they would move around the action spot to get LOS that might work. The regular squad had a perfectly good LOS too. I even moved the regular squad out of the building and couldn't make it work.

If I had two units, a regular thirteen man marine squad, and a smaw team in the same room. The squad could see a T-62, in three WEGO turns of trying I could not get the guys with the rocket launcher to the right window with the beautiful side shot of the tank. Is there any way to fix this? It is about as irritating a bug as the game has left. Maybe some special way to move guys around in action spot in special condition, or an AI routine to get the rocket launcher where it needs to go. I am fairly certain the squad leader would be yelling for the guy with the heat warhead at the top of his lungs.

Play the battle for Poo in the Marines campaign. Play George Mc's Hammertime if you don't have the Marines module. It is on CMMODS. Then come post again.

I would second Panzerfest on the ability, and perhaps requirement to spread area fire more widely. I would frequently like a machine gun to hose down the hole building without endless micromanagement. I also Agree with him on the the reduction in effectiveness of Borg spotting targets. So this could help both ways depending on implementation. It seems like most of the U.I. could adapted from the arty screens.

It never ceases to amaze me that people will pay two or three thousand dollars for a computer to run the game on, and then yell about 5 dollars here and there to help out the best game company in the business. You didn't buy that one gig 8800 card to play Scrabble or run Word after all. Dollars per hour of entertainment BFC may the best bargain on the planet. Try getting an answer, much less a patch from Creative Assembly if you don't believe me.

C3k, the unit based heights get added to whatever terrain the unit is sitting on. So if you are standing on a three story building, you get roof elevation plus five feet. Terrain height has been taken into account since day 1. I am also having an issue with the instantly disappearing bad guy that is related to the ? markers. They are going away in seconds. I would like to be able to tell my sniper team that if that ATGM shows it head in the same window that it had better get messily rearranged in about 3 seconds plus flight time of the round.

I would really , really like that actually.

Yes to all of the above Gunny.

Bad Moon Rising is totally tactics dependent. If you advance the Abrams to the low rise in the middle of the map and stop in a hull down position you can wipe out the T-90s for the loss of 1-3 Abrams. In fact the position is so good you barely have to give another order. The T-90 however is good enough to make it tactically dependent which is certainly an improvement over the T-72. I don't think most peoples computers could handle enough T-72s to make that one interesting.

Since Huntarr asked, I think BFC should do a separate module that includes the following features drones, medics, Excalibur arty, and ENGINEERING VEHICLES. It would do more to expand the gameplay than almost anything else they could do for the blue side. It would allow completely different scenarios. Not least the building of the wall through Sadr City. All of the above are very important in real world operations.

I think my little idea could precede the EFV by quite some length of time, unless there are some miracles on both the engineering and cost/procurement side. The gun and fire control system are unquestionably excellent on the EFV, but they seem to have over reached on the high level of vehicle performance both in and out of the water. A sports car that also makes a good speed boat is a fairly tall order. The Sec-Def just gave a little speech about letting the best be the enemy of the good with a war on if memory serves. Thanks for taking the time to reply, and for your considerable contribution to the game and the board.

I would bring up the missing Abrams' dozer blades, but BFC has done such a good job on the Marines and 1.10 it would be cruel.

Sgt Joch's Idea is excellent but I think the points should be recalculated every turn based on unit condition and the quality of communication with headquarters. It would matter very little what a tank platoon had done so far as long as they were unsuppressed, mechanically healthy, good on ammo and in good communication with their company commander. Degrade any of these, and many others that could be added, and their responsiveness goes down.

Having played with the Marines Module enough to truly irritate my wife, I keep coming back to a single idea. If the AAVs were equipped with a fire control computer that allowed for indirect fire the effectiveness of a marine unit supported by them would increase by at least one hundred percent. They already carry a ton of ammo, but are very vunlerable to almost everything. Being able to park them behind a building or a hill and shower the bad guys with 40mm love would solve an enormous list of tactical problems with a very small outlay of development time and money. Their is surely an FCS out there that could be adapted for this purpose with minimal reprogramming. There has to be a little spare space in that bus some where. BFC, how hard would it be to give the AAVs this ability in game, just for kicks and experimentation? Any opinion Huntarr? Feel free to tell me why it won't work.

"That kind of monthly subscription for game content/moduls is something we'll probably never even consider, at least not as long as I'm around Similarily a strong no to "paying for beta testing" or any other similar models out there." from Moon You obviously have a better understanding of your business model than I do. I just want you guys to breakthrough to the next level where we can see what you do with a REAL development budget.

Let paying members vote on feature/unit priorities for upcoming titles. Maybe set a small percentage of the total development time aside to deal with the paying member suggested features. Given the truly excellent experience I have had with BFC over several years I would happily sign up for a monthly subscription plan instead of purchasing by the game/module. Especially if it came with real multiplayer support. I would certainly pay $25 per year for the service you are describing, it works out to about 5 cents an hour, based on my usage.

I would pre-order it today! I would also greatly appreciate an Iranian/Pakistani Module. Since most of the major weapons systems are already in the game I don't think it would be all that coding intensive either. A lot of skinning and TO&E effort, but not enormous amounts of brand new coding.

Surely BFC could add that suggestion to the iron-man rules in about ten second. Please?, Maybe?

"I'm having a hard time keeping my T90s alive vs Abrams in 'Bad Moon Rising' PBEM - its sooo open its hard to get a flanking shot." Spoiler Alert * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * There is a very subtle terrain feature in that scenario that makes it very easy for the U.S. player if they use it correctly. I advanced my tanks to that point and barely gave another command the rest of the scenario. This was against the AI, but the map is so featureless I can't see what a human player would do differently as the Syrians. At some point I want to alter that map and see what happens. I don't think it shows off the T90 very well.

Could coplay and/or WEGO TCP/IP make the end of war title. Either one would be worth the 45 bucks all by itself. Game is great, can't wait for more!

Played this today. It is truly excellent for getting a feel for the basics of a Marine platoon. It is especially helpful in helping you to understand the effective engagement range of various platoon level weapon systems. Thanks Yair!

Spoiler Alert* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I played it about 8 times and I finally concluded the way to keep your tanks alive was to use massive suppressive fire from the AAVs. In particular the AAVs of the reinforcing platoon can be placed out of range of most of the enemies assets and just drench large portions of the buildings facing the square with fire. I leave the original platoons AAVs in around the square with the tanks with target arcs to allow them to hit pop up targets. You kinda have to pick, keep the tanks alive or follow the brief on targeting ROE. I guess I would rather level the village and discuss it with the higher ups later than wright those letters. It is rather handy that the 40mm grenades don't really knock buildings down too readily. I didn't blow off the ROE completely but once a single bad guy popped up somewhere I figured that house had volunteered for continued attention. If you get the second platoon of infantry into fighting positions more or less intact your fire power advantage become pretty overwhelming and the bad guys start to look holey almost the instant they appear.