LukeFF

Just a reminder: this "ticking" sound can still be heard ever so slightly, at least with the Challenger. It's a simple edit of the audio file for the Challenger to eliminate the problem. So, how about for 1.31?

Cool! Thing is, I noticed this issue a while ago, but I never brought it up, because I figured that the Syrians just commanded their squads differently. Better late than never.

While we're on the subject... I've noticed that squad leaders for Syrian infantry units display no rank insignia, either. Is this a bug, or do Privates in the Syrian Army really lead infantry squads?

The M16 and M4 do not sound much like their real-world counterparts. They have a much sharper and pronounced crack than the game would lead one to believe.

None of the uniforms for any of the nations have rank insignia.

Not that I'm aware of.

...are incredibly durable: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=982_1287162255

WASR-10s are initially built by Cugir and imported into the US by Century. The latter then modifies them with U.S.-made parts in order to comply with 922®.

Will the campaigns focus on a particular (aka, core) unit like in CMSF?

Tell me about it. I sigh every time I see that weeny 10-round mag and magazine lock on my Romanian AK.

The latest Catalyst drivers work fine for me. I'm not at my gaming computer at the moment, though, so I can't say what my settings are in the Catalyst Control Panel.

There is a CMBB forum.

We need M1 thumb.

Agreed. Good recommendations.

Some things I'd like to see: -More animations when a unit is stationary but not necessarily in contact with the enemy. -Better animations for the soldiers manning ATGMs. Right now it looks like they use the stock machine gun animation, which doesn't fit well. -Forward observers/air controllers, etc., using their binoculars when stationary and/or calling in air/artillery support. -A little more fluid grenade throwing animation. -As written above: pistol-firing animations. -More "cowering" animations than the one "roll to one side" animation we have now. One where the soldier stays prone and puts his head down with both hands on his helmet would be good. -Secondary weapons (i.e., RPGs, AT4s, etc.) slung on one shoulder. -The main gun on Soviet tanks and the Challenger elevating after firing a round.

I've seen that particular behavior with destroyed BMP-3s. The things are spewing explosives everywhere, yet troops that are 20 meters or less away from them just sit there unharmed.

Alright, much better. Got a surrender from the AI with 29 minutes left on the clock. Glad to finally have some success with this mission. --SPOILERS-- One thing I did better this time was to sight my GPMG and GMGs better, so they were able to interdict BMPs attempting to reinforce the village. That, and I learned Apaches are very good at taking out troops inside buildings with their 30mm cannon. Pushing with two platoons from one side of the village, with one on the other providing cover, worked fairly well, though that #$#^$%%! PKM in the building near the 'Margaret' river crossing caused me no little grief. I don't know how much indirect fire it took to finally silence him.

Hmm, I'll have to keep that in mind. What I could possibly do is use the first platoon as sort of a 'cordon' on the far side of town, to catch any units attempting to flee and to provide supporting fire where the opportunity arises. In turn, I could use, as you say, the other two platoons in a combined thrust at the other end of town, opposite the Malcolm crossing. It would certainly make for more firepower, that's for sure.

Yep, I already do that. Works pretty well, aside from the ammo resupply issues.

Typically what I do is move the first platoon across 'Margaret' to take the St. Giles objective and clear out any infantry on hills overlooking the objective. So long as I don't do anything stupid this objective isn't too hard to achieve. After that, I'll move the second platoon across 'Margaret' as well and have them take up a position to the east (?) of the town. Once the third platoon shows up I move them across the left edge of the map, to set up a sort of pincer maneuver with the second platoon. Of course, this is where things usually go bad for me, as it's a chore coordinating the movement of so many units. Should I possibly be moving other infantry platoons across Malcolm?

I really like this scenario, but it seems that I start to lose my way once more friendly reinforcements show up on the map (I play in real time). Trying to coordinate the movement of three different platoons, making sure supporting MGs have enough ammo, calling in arty and mortar strikes...it seems like I end up pausing the game more than letting it play out, or I end up moving a unit into a bad situation. Any particular advice for getting the most out of this scenario?

I do realize the AT-14 can fire anti-personnel (i.e., thermobaric) rounds, but does the in-game model of the AT-14 even have this type of round? I've only ever seen them armed with HEAT rounds.

Good to hear, thanks.

It seems like the AI is very eager to use AT-14 missiles against infantry. Doesn't this seem like a waste of an expensive missile in an attempt to knock a couple of infantrymen? Does Soviet/Syrian doctrine call for the use of AT missiles against infantry in the open?

I've been observing this issue now for several weeks, across different browsers and different computers, cache and cookies cleared to make sure nothing funky is going on at my end. The issue is there no matter what, and, as far as I can tell, the issue crops up in the following circumstance: If a thread with new messages in it does not advance to a new page, then the forum software will not automatically mark the message as read when returning to the listing of threads in the given forum. Put another way: if, for example, I open a one-page message that has one new reply in it, the message will not be automatically marked as read. However, if a thread has new replies in it that causes a new page to be created, then the forum software will mark the message as read.