sburke

Well yeah. Not sure what the specific item you are referring to here but yeah generally people are f’d up.

CMRT had problems with previous patch so hard to say if this is continuation or not. Honestly not sure why CMRT has its own specific issues with this.

Whew okay I will spell slowly. A nuke knows the difference between a monarch and just your ordinary person. Note sarcasm. I don’t really think a nuke differentiates just as I don’t believe you meant just the monarchies but rather the entire countries in question. note use of emoticon is for no other reason than to comply with what seems like their mandatory usage.

Yeah a nuke knows that.

Ummm you do realize where all the special minerals come from that Elon musk and all that high tech gear needs comes from right? And that is a pretty bigoted comment about the third world. If you were on the receiving end of the economic exploitation model I expect your views on the world might be significantly different. What are you going to call them next “untermensch”?

Yes it does and in pretty good depth. There is a considerable amount on the British Force commitment and differing strategies driven by Whitehall versus the Multinational force command. The debacle of the British withdrawal from Basra is covered in detail in volume 2. Though it is a US army analysis it is not a “US Army” history. It is an analysis of the entire Iraq conflict and covers geopolitical analysis as well including some very brutal assessments in the failures of US planning at all levels. Fascinating coverage of what things were done right, what weren’t and very transparent criticisms for example of US commanders who were apparently punished for their actions in the long term even though they were very clearly right and ahead of their higher level commanders at the time. No good deed goes unpunished as they say. The level of detail on the insurgency itself is really fascinating. Also the extent of Iranian involvement and the inability of the US to ever address that at a strategic level is covered in a lot of detail including analysis of the actual Iranian commanders involved and specific actions the Iranians were behind at different points. It is a very long read (the combined volumes are some 1400 pages) it is by far the best read I have comes across on the war to examine from strategic and operational perspectives. The most depressing part is the betrayal of the Anbar awakening by the Maliki government and it’s direct consequence - ISIS and it is free https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1373

For anyone who hasn’t considered yet, this is well worth it. Just finished volume 2. Phenomenal work and for those interested in how AQI was able to come back from near extinction to forming the caliphate under ISIS it also covers that in pretty amazing detail. Highly recommended reading.

Absolutely. Unless you are trying to adhere to a specific rule set, a human attacker has far more options over the AI and so should you. Smoke for example is never used by the AI as it could be by either side.

Well I won’t piss in your cornflakes. If your optimism is rewarded I’ll be a very happy gamer.

The Middle East is far more complicated than most of us realize. Reading the US army review of the Iraq war is really an eye opener. There is a tremendous amount of detail about the insurgency which at the time was not well understood. Fascinating read for anyone interested. I am only about 30% of the way through volume 2. As to CMSF2. We won’t be getting anything additional. It is done (except for some of the campaigns that are still being reworked). Personally I’d love BF to do more on it, but realize it isn’t going to happen. So many things I’d love to see incorporated.

Yes we would. We are all cheaters and protecting our secrets. I’m with @Sgt.Squarehead get an opponent that doesn’t cheat. My regular opponent and I don’t even use passwords That way after the battle we can both chose to review the whole thing or not at our leisure.

plus it is always fun to watch a Javelin kill

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/e2-80-98my-first-mission-was-normandy-e2-80-99-world-war-ii-pilots-recall-role-in-history/ar-AACougR

Obviously watchman Ko did not serpentine.

Save or it didn’t happen.

oh yeah, had a lot of experience trying to convert CMSF to CMSF2 adding in the water. Something I hope never to have to do again.

heh heh yeah as in - "But it’s not detailed with objects, trees and vegetation or buildings. The idea is that you first cut out the area you want to use, then detail just the actual area of your battle. Still way faster than a map from scratch. " I do have a version I am working on filling it in, but it is something I only peck at once in a while. Keep in mind Broadsword was working on that map back before we had overlays etc. It takes a while for that map to load and detailing it bit by bit is a really long endeavor. I am in the same place with Sadr City. No way am I going to detail it with flavor items. I'll be amazed if I can get it to load just being prepopulated with buildings.

Yeah I can confirm the result. I took your file - named every team able through hotel so I could ID who changed or not. Then used that as a core unit and imported to a new test scenario. Result is when I open the battle I get different names when I open it. I think this is why. When you name them, you are designating the current leader. However when you load the game if it decides the current leader is the discard for the 50% then it gives a new name. The only way naming would consistently work is if the leader was always the one retained. It would explain why I haven't seen this - I always start with the full OoB. When I set the scenario to full strength, I always get the units as named.

or as Joni Mitchell said in the original lyrics before a beta tester gave her grief I've looked at trees from both sides now From up and down, and still somehow It's tree illusions I recall I really don't know trees at all

That is odd. I spend a lot on time creating formation OoB to import specifically so I can have the names in advance. I haven't run across that yet. I don't tend to do it with reduced size units though. I'll give it a whirl and see what pops up. Do you have any specific examples that I can trial that seem more troublesome?

What Elvis said As I noted before I had an idea whose intent was similar - I wanted to know all my pixeltruppens names from the start as opposed to only learning them when the team leader bit the dust. It would have essentially allowed you to do what you wanted without having to alter how formation headcount was done. It was also declined. Is there no other way to work your idea short of asking for a game design change? How much impact does it have on the design if you have a few individuals whose names you don't know at start? It is one thing to push the game to come up with new and interesting ideas on design, it is another to say I want Charles to change X so I can make this one scenario. If I put that in the BF suggestion box Charles is likely to cane me.... politely. "sburke this is going to hurt me more than it will hurt you...oh nah who are we kidding, this is just gonna hurt you."

I was okay with your ability … or inability to apply the ratio correctly TO A FORMATION. I was not prepared to understand your challenges at reading the responses from others indicating you can't apply that 50% directly to individual teams. My bad. As to the definition of insanity I was referring to Vaas in Far Cry 3.

My math teacher would tell you that you didn’t understand the starting formula and would give you an F. No matter how many ways you say it no one else has said that the 50% is applied how you interpret it. In fact they said the opposite. Repeating yourself doesn’t make you right, it just makes you repetitive Have you ever heard the definition of insanity?

Beware trying to do Jungle combat. I played around with CMFI as the weaponry seemed appropriate for early Vietnam...… let's just say it was a bit less interesting than I'd hoped. CM just doesn't work that well for it. Unit posture for example gets really problematic.

Yep that is gonna motivate them...…