Homo ferricus

looky what i found while reading a link from another thread. titled, "Security firms join Somali piracy fight" http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/af_somalia_piracy_protection;_ylt=A2KIKvOXJgVJckMB8REUewgF nice, long article about the whole ordeal, mentions how some security firms aren't even arming their operatives, but are using some pretty interesting non-lethal forms of deterrent, a la greased/electrified hand rails, high-pressure hoses, the infamous microwave cannons and of course LRAD. make sure to read the part about how a certain tugboat defends itself from maritime piracy... Makes me seasick just thinking about it.

The new government-produced mutant super-soldier. two heads for increased awareness, four arms for multitasking. Only one side effect! Elephantiasis of the right nut! I guess they need to start producing those extra sized groin protectors as well.

"C'mon boy! I bet you can squeal! Squeal like a piggy!"

I have to agree with Cpl Steiner--in the Allah's Fist scenario, one of my Abrams M1A2 tanks (veteran crew) took literally 20 or so direct hits to the front of the tank from a whole mess of t-62s, along with an additional 15-20 ricochets. TC KIA, gunner was at wounded status, optics/smoke launchers/treads/targeting computer all 100% knocked out, yet my immobilized/blind/black-out (i didn't even hear the engine running anymore) Abrams was able to return fire in this state and systematically knock out about a half dozen t-62s. Seems peculiar to me.

What kind of munitions is the "naval gunfire" supposed to simulate? As far as i remember they haven't put big guns on ships since WWII, and all those ships have been decommissioned. But modern destroyers have some well-calibred cannon on them, don't they. Maybe not 155mm. O well, just a thought.

oh yeah, i'm in. This is something i have also privately thirsted for, you think radio chatter and new reload sounds make for great immersion? This kind of campaign is really what will make one feel like a true military commander, the level of uncertainty in entering a situation in this hypothetical campaign is what will really keep you awake with tension during scenarios, as the arma player mentioned. In fact, i live about 40 minutes north of you, Field Marshal Blücher, if you need any kind of local, man-on-man playtesting and feedback or help.

About the most that a cargo ship (or any other considerably large ship) can do against a pirate attack (granted it is not armed with any lethal or non-lethal weapons, and/or is not being escorted by warships, USVs, aircraft or mercs) is to turn vigorously left to right, essentially doing a slalom in an attempt to create waves large enough to flip the pirate boat. I imagine it looks more like a desperate, pitiful flail for life from the top down viewpoint--something perhaps comparable to a brontosaurus getting clusterf***ed by velociraptors, for those of us who appreciate classics such as "Jurassic Park". or perhaps it is more like an old tymer bludgeoning an SSN half to death with his metaphorical club of social ruin and self-esteem deprivation leaving the victim motionless in a pool of his own newly discovered doubt, dissonance, and hatred for the world on a Peng thread, for those of us with too much time on our hands. :-)

Well i agree completely, but strictly legally speaking... I'm not sure what kind of clauses (with respect to international law) exist that let non-military ships respond (or perhaps, prepare to respond) to pirate attacks with lethal force. I'm interested with this USV stuff, maybe i'll do some reading here...

yep, LRAD. http://www.defense-update.com/products/l/LRAD.htm This was an interesting article i found, explicitly mentions use in maritime non-lethal self-defense along with an example of its use off the Somali coast by a cruise liner to successfully repel pirates attacking with RPGs. Also mentions the Navy using them in in the Gulf to regulate shipping coming and going from Basra. It also mentions something about (armed) unmanned surface vehicles (USV) quoting the article now, "as international maritime law does not allow commercial vessels to carry heavy armament." The second half is about MRAD and its use by ground forces during OIF, it seems.

Blackwater and other similar PMCs offer maritime protection, i would think that should be taken advantage of on an individual basis. Is it too expensive and not seen as cost-efficient for the people running all the non-military boats in that area? Or does Blackwater for political or recent PR reasons not want to participate?

STILL SPOILERS FROM MISSION THREE!!!!!!! * * * * Well, i was well aware of the new lack of AT assets, and there was nothing but ammo on my mind in regards to my AT teams, especially when the armor shows up. I actually ended up not using a single LAW/AT-4 (well, actually one squad did use one AT-4 on some infantry), i threw all the smaw i had at them, including HEDP/HE. Then, when reinforcements arrived, all i did was shuffle AT teams back and forth from nearby AAVs for resupply, thats when i really got the chance to get the lead out. Or in this case, the HEAT out... i guess. Not to bad either, i expected much more brutal results but finished with 11 KIA and 10 WIA on the first try.

i got the same LAV rear-hatch-won't-close issue. mounted up a recon platoon and every single one of the LAVs took off with rear hatches wide open. vehicle pathfinding a little peculiar, as mentioned by others. I don't understand why my unarmored/unarmed MTVR decided it needed to face the enemy before allowing my Marines to disembark. The thing slowly rotated on a dime to face the enemy as Marines in the bed were getting picked off two at a time by a sniper and an enemy squad. Its the most frustrating thing in the world to watch that vulnerable open-top thing loaded with Marines slowly turning in place as i yell at my computer while violently clicking on the grayed-out "dismount" button. Also, I'm not sure if this was something that was fixed in CMSF and then unfixed in Marines or something, or perhaps it was deemed too trivial for BFC to give their attention to it but... there is still an awkward visual glitch--weapon magazines suddenly move to awkward positions when their carriers do a FAST or QUICK type movement.

BIG mistake. in my honest opinion, if you become a part of it, you've already lost. But do give these old timers a listen and FLEE FOR YOU LIFE. or for your self-esteem, at least.

cough, SPORE ON THE 7TH... ahem...

Actually, it's not. I believe it's 7.62 NATO. In any case, i'd like to see some actual MRAPs like cougars and buffalos, and maybe some of those South African Do-hickies. Guardians are kinda in that category too (i think the designation is M1117). But those probably won't fit the scope or context of the game, so realistically speaking, i'd hope to see self-propelled AA platforms in future modules, both in the AA function and the direct-fire ground support function as we had in CMX1.

back to riding atop tanks! I say!

Yes </font>

Quit breaking Steve's balls. We are all anxious and want our favorite vehicles to be on the list, but for crying out loud, even if asking helped, don't rush the guys!

I've never played, nor do i have time to at the moment, but i suspect that you need to rerun your anti-armor tactics. First of all, Javelins to every unit if you got them, second of all, you dont want to have a direct confrontation between your MGS and Syrian T-72s. I realize it's a meeting engagement so ambushes on your part might be tricky, but you definitely need to establish covered and defiladed firing positions for the MGS where they can spot Syrian tanks friving by and knock them out, hull down positions would also help. This is kinda simple stuff, what im saying is sit behind somewhere and let the Syrians drive by--blow them away. In these type scenarios in CMSF, it often becomes a competition of winning armor superiority first, then deal with the rest of the battle, much like in modern conflict where you need air superiority before you can work the ground. if you got unchallenged vehicle support, you got a great advantage in the infantry fight. obviously

Will we see MRAPs or up-armored patrol/misc vehicles? will it help to say please ahead of time? please?

I hope that at least one MRAP or up-armored patrol vehicle makes it in. It seems that, according to some of the scenarios included in the original missions and campaign, Battlefront has excepted COIN as at least SOME part of modern warfare that tends to complement conventional military slug-fests. Besides that, I'm sure that there are piles of us who want to make some Iraq/Afghanistan scenarios or perhaps just something else fictional. I'm sure they'd have their fair share of purposes in the game--combat patrol, IED detection, mine detection, reconnaissance, command vehicle, etc. So, BFC, if you guys can go ahead and sneak in a Guardian or Cougar or sumfink, yeeaaaaaaaa, that would be greeeeaaaat, ummmmkay? maybe a Buffalo. Hell, I'm happy with a frag-5'ed humvee.

pfff, 1.06? That's in the dust, I'm waiting for 1.08 already.

So that means that it's an active defense, not a passive one--correct? meaning that it at some point incorporates a warhead-defeating projectile, and i also suspect possibly an obscurant at some point... be it smoke, some sort of jammer, or maybe just a huge peice of cardboard erected in front of the tank?

i say stick 'em in the Marine Module! It looks like most of the modeling and animation is already done, now, just code! I've spoken with a couple of mortar Marines, and according to them, their mortars are put to use more often than many would expect.

LoneSyrian is right about the hex, guys. The other day, i played a scenario as the US and did marvelously, i later got up to use the restroom and stubbed my toe something awful. Not bloody awful, you know? Just sorta, "that mildly hurt" awful? Whatever.