sburke

who gives a s**t about Nukes. I still want Fulda Gap. Team Yankee!!!! (Funny enough in Team Yankee they do confront a nuclear launch by Russia taken from Hackett's World War 3 novel scenario and the corresponding response for units at the front line and it is eminently doable with CM ) This nuclear discussion is not helping to sway Steve's mind so if you are interested in a Fulda Gap game I suggest not bringing it up every time someone says let's have CM Fulda Gap.....

That may be a way to win, but it doesn't really meet the point of the scenario which is to defend the position. That is more a strategy to take advantage of the limitations of the Strat AI. I can guarantee that doing that against a human player would have you wiped out. I have played that scenario to a win fighting to defend the position. It can be done

Heh heh absolutely. Only issue with this mod is I am not sure there is a way to carry it out. One of the things I really like about CMSF is there is more diversity. Not a PC thing it just makes it a little more immersive to me when individual pixeltruppen aren’t all uniformly the same. The problem with a female mod is I don’t think it will stand out very much. If there were more variety in soldier models it would be really cool but that isn’t gonna happen. But hey if someone can mod the face to make it more apparent then hell yeah.

No and you should not. You would never know in real life whether you actually jammed an unknown device. The red player is able to identify if the device isn’t working but I don’t believe they can identify if it has been jammed. I played around with some of the units looking at IED behavior and basically there is no way to relax your sphincter. I wish there was some chance to spot an IED and at least make an effort to avoid it. There are ways to do so as an editor by having the IED in a touch point or even by having no IED but having a suspicious spotting, but the actual IED carries no possibility of being identified...... unless it blows up.

again you are jumping to a conclusion. 1. So far all I have done is read through the thread. I have a full time job that is in hyper mode at the moment and I have been traveling so I can't even load the game to check the saves, the map etc. therefore I haven't an opinion yet. I try not to form one without first looking through the data and making sure I understand the case and try to reproduce it. Forming an opinion too soon creates bias, bias leads to misinterpreting data. What I can say is I haven't seen anything in my playing CMSF2 pretty extensively for a number of months testing scenarios etc that would lead me to think there is a lot of odd TAC AI behavior. I do see things occasionally and if I can reproduce it, I report it. Based on that I find it plausible you may have found an issue. What exactly that issue is, potential frequency and my ability to duplicate it are all things I haven't the means to answer yet. 2. TAC AI issues are very difficult items with a lot of possible influences for example there was an issue a while back (unresolved as far as I know) where individual pixeltruppen get separated from their team possibly because of terrain features. I know the first time I experienced it was a CMBN scenario I was playing PBEM back in 1.0 (scenario was the mace - I can't believe I actually remember that ) Steve's post above regarding corner cases though is probably far more relevant We all want CM to be better However it is software. Software tends to occasionally produce crap and the conditions that got it to produce crap can be really hard to determine. Hell I just wrapped up a several hour call with a vendor on an issue that we fixed but we have no idea what was the initial cause (and I doubt we will get an actual cause out of them).

That is your assessment. Troubleshooting however relies on factual information so if it is not behavior introduced in 4.0 that would be relevant from a code perspective. I.e one does not need to look for something introduced as new code. You are not in a position (nor am I) to say if there is a change in TAC AI behavior that Charles might want to look at but as Ian and I are two of the people you would expect to submit as a ticket to BF we do need to define what it is we might be submitting. We do know there were changes relative to responses to arty fire for example. If we know that this behavior was evident prior to 4.0 then there is no chance that whatever was done on that isn’t having an impact here I am certainly not going to open a ticket on behavior in 3.0 however I do need to know if this is new behavior or not It seems from chops that it may not be therefore....... the ticket we might open won’t cite this as new behavior so it becomes a “simpler” issue of looking at the TAC AI versus the TAC AI 3.12 versus 4.0 So does it seem relevant now? or I could just say f**k it if folks are gonna blow me off and just ignore it. Honestly I think Ian was justified in his remark as your last comment makes it look like my simple question puts me in the area of people not “contributing to a solution”. I find that fairly offensive as I was simply asking a question to see if we could clarify a bit of a discrepancy as to his comment and yours. As that is apparently not cooperating with your expectations on contributing I will bow out and leave you to it.

And at night. A moonless night.

Question. Pericles is noting a specific incident. He as far as I know has not claimed that this is something that happens a lot (the thread title says rare) nor has he as far as I can tell noted it as specific to 4.0. In your comment you seem to indicate it is not rare and in 4.0, but you noted you have seen for a long time which I expect means you saw it prior to 4.0. Is that a fair summation?

Correct. The only thing I don’t think is clear yet is how the updated campaigns will be released. BF will I am sure clarify once they have a better idea when those will be completed.

CMSF2 is not an upgrade per se. It is CMSF redone in the 4.0 engine so look at it as 2 very similar games, but one is way better.

You need to open a ticket with the help desk.

Lol makes one wonder why BF goes through all the effort of doing such specific ToEs if even the vets do this sort of thing.

Forgive my ignorance, but was the TOW vehicle mounted? question 2 is there a difference in battery usage on the two devices?

No idea, one of our vets would have to speak to that.

They are an AT team not an FO and they (in RL) can’t just sit there using up the thermals

Funny no matter how much I play this game sand zoom in looking at my pixeltruppen, I always love seeing other folks pics and perspective. Those are some great cinematic shots above.

Excellent, very happy to be proven wrong!

His buildindgs work, but not all aspects. I am away from pc for a week, but my faint recollection is the roof mods don’t show.

There is only one possible course of action my friend, buckle up, lock and load and go make one, now!

Hey everyone, the demo was just released.

I had almost that exact incident in the Hamel Vallee AAR and the brave soul’s name was Hardenberger. The next and final turn the guy who was surrendering was shot.

The Snitch- rates as one of my favorites. I also liked how he incorporated a special OPS team working with your Airborne platoon on the mission.

The Mord Bunker?

you can design it anyway you want so if you want periodic reinforcements for redfor, that has always been available. Not sure what the question is.

Damn I am glad my PC gaming is pretty limited to CM these days....