Flanker15
-
Posts
756 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Flanker15
-
-
Picture:
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/5812/whitetextyq4.png
I'm using the same driver and system as when I had the white shell casing prob but I didn't get this then. I imagine that certain font data is missing or broken.
White shell casings still there though:
http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/56/whiteshellof4.png
I'm using a new 9800GTX+ card with driver 6.14.0011.7813 released september 2008. I'm pretty sure the new card or driver is doing the white shell casings but the white box around text is something else.
-
I got my comp fixed finally but now I have a new prob, all the writing on the main menu, objectives and on the AAR is black with a white box around it. Anyone know about this.
Screenshots on request.
thanks!
-
Sort of sounds like overheating. Try opening your case and pointing a desk fan into and see if it stops.
-
I noticed the vids for this on Youtube today from back in July, they look really, really good. Is anything happening with it? It looked pretty fantastic even if it was WIP.
-
Were your T-90s shooting the right kind of ammo? (HE againsts tanks bug?)
If you were hitting the side or rear of the M1 you should be able to one shot knockout with KE or HEAT ammo. The M1 has very thin side and rear armor compared to the turret front, you should be able to knockout those facings with Soviet ammo at over 3000m. At 50m the shell would probably go through several M1 side turrets if you lined them up (heck you'd have a pretty good chance of knock out from the front too). Only the TUSK versions have serious armor added to those areas but it's more against HEAT shells not KE.
Of course the other thing is the M1 has very good internal saftey layout, you were penertrating it but not causing any knockout damage (damaging systems, hurting crew but not damaging anything critical).
-
I don't like canister rounds much they're very hit and miss, you could hit every target with one shot then miss all of them with the next. PELE, airburst frag and beehive rounds are much more consistent in their performance and work against tragets in buildings or trenches, where canister only works against unprotected targets.
Also the lives of soldiers are most certainly not more important than civillians, they are paid to get shot at and die the civillians are not. I know that the US is very carful when there are civillains in the area and won't use any weapons that might hurt them (bombs, shells, explosives in general). If they come under attack by a building they suspect has civillians in it they secure it with infantry, not just blow it up.
-
(at the low end of equipment quality, for example)
I thought that's how it worked now?
-
Can Green's 2 duplicate threads be merged?
-
I have a couple of suggestions for the opfor force booster:
The ZSU-23-4 Shilka, the ZU-23-2 AAA gun (these would be mainly for anti ground fighting, but coding for shooting/blocking choppers would be a plus), an unamored truck (a Ural or something, a Ural with a ZU-23-2 mounted on the back would be a neat addition too), re-enforced trenches/buildings and more defensive structures would be a big plus too.
-
What does the "armor" option actually do? It seems to use standard HE shells, are they on a slight delay fuse to maximise penertration? Or just a slightly different shot pattern?
-
No operations? Oh well they will be missed but the new campaign system is better anyway.
I hope persistent battlefields are ready in some form for the WW2 release, there are countless battles where armies fought each other over the same bit of land for days or even weeks.
While craters, wrecks and damage to structures are very important to a lengthy battle, I have very fond memories of other parts of operations in CMx1 games.
Things like shifting fronts and fighting over who controls tacticle pieces of terrain for the next battle. I remember having a Priest mobile artillary being immobilised in the first battle but still being able to support my defenses for 3 more battles before the front line overran it. I remember abandoned tanks being recoverable if you kept them on your side of the front, or damaged tanks being repairable to an extent. I could go on for ages about the good times I had with operations and I hope to have them again some day with CMx2 games.
Oh and if we'll get flame throwers, does that mean we'll get burning terrain? Yay!
-
They area already present in CMSF. The Ghost campaign has one, and I believe one of Paper Tiger's campaigns has one or two. In fact the first two missions of the Marines campaign constitute one as well.
Do they have persistant craters, destruction, vehicle wrecks, immobilised vehicles a shifting front line and such? (comps broken, so I don't know).
-
Will operations return, or some form of fighting back and forth over the same battlefield?
-
That non reative AI problem would be solved by adding in conditions, events and triggers.
The Ai has a unit guarding a buiding, you write a condition for the unit: casualties = 50% to 100% randomised. You have the backup unit and give it an event of going to reinforce the building if the first condition is true (with a 80% chance of doing it for randomness sake). Then you have a trigger for the reinforcement unit: if it detects enemy units under x distance 40% of returning to origional defensive line. If it recieves fire from enemy unit 80% chance of returning.
A very simple script but it adds great dynamics to the battle, imagine what 100s of complex scripts could do?
-
Since the gods have decided to deny my playing of Marines some more by breaking my computer again I thought I'd ask some questions that I was going to test myself:
-With the new TUSK M1 tanks, do they have a different ammo load out? I usually hear that TUSK tanks are used when there is no enemy armor so they switch their APFSDS shells for more anti-infantry shells (HEAT, HE, cannister, PELE etc...).
-The new dismounted MK19, TOW2 and .50 MG that are in the Marines modual, can they be used with US army soldiers (US uniforms, not just putting Marine units in then switching)?
-Same question but for the TOW Hmmwv?
Thanks!
-
I distinctly remember someone saying that KIA is worse than WIA by some ammount (50%?). Might of been my imagination though, anyway you get some ammo and you save your little dudes that's enough incentive!
-
You could make one with a little effort using the manual and experimenting, all the infos there already.
-
If it could be done, I'd do it the way all the other games with it do: If the vehicle is below a certain speed (5km/h, stopped, whatever) it deploys and if it's over that speed it retracts. So a brad, LAV-AT etc... will have its launcher deployed if the vehicle is stopped or moving "slow", if it goes over that speed it retracts until the vehicle is stopped or moving slow again.
On the note of the launcher deploy times not being modeled, I thought they were modeled in the coding but not visualy modeled?
-
My strat is to analyse the terrain features and set up the tanks in reverse slope/ambush posistions. Also I like to spread my tanks out across the map in this manner not all in one bunch, this way you only lose a few tanks if a M1 gets a good LOS on your posistion. If you can setup good posistions the M1's superior armor, weapon and sensors do not factor into the combat since you're fighting at point blank.
If you're fighting on the offensive you can't really use this tactic and you're at a great disadvantage. Just try to get as close as you can to the enemy posistions without exposing your tanks to fire. Attack with strength of numbers from 2 or more directions if you can so as to overwhelm the enemy and try to close as much distance as possible. The closer you get the more chance your T-72 has of getting a kill, while the M1 can kill your T-72 at any range.
-
The modern TIS on the SEP tanks are fantasticly sensitive. It is reported that in the right conditions you can see warmer areas on the ground where vehicles and troops have passed through earlier. Should be able to pick out the latent heat from the motor and leading edges of a ATGM pretty easy with one.
The problem with the IFVs staring at a ATGM as it comes in is they don't really have enough time to evade at the close ranges in SF's smallish maps. Sure you could try to shunt to the side but the guider should be able to compensate easily for that, the only real options are to try to kill/suppress the guider with something that flys faster or to get your strongest armor facing the missile. At longer ranges you could try to evade behind terrain, obstacle, create a nice smoke screen or try to break the wire on a tree.
-
Knowing that missile has been launched at you is mainly reliant of spotting the launch puff and knowning that there are ATGM launchers present in the area so you're prepared.
In steel beasts it's pretty easy to spot a ATGM coming in since they look like a giant fire ball from any direction, of course in reality the flare is mounted on the back of the missile so from the front it looks like a little dot. If a missile is launched and nobody spotted the puff you won't know until it's too late or unless you get real lucky and spot it by chance.
-
Hi chaps, I recently had to repair my computer and in the process I added a 9800GTX+, I did this before I got to play Marines but after the last time I played CM:SF so I'm not sure if it's me or the game. Now all the ejecting brass in the games has turned white instead of the simple texture it is supposed to have, is this a known issue?
I have latest versions of everything.
-
Most of those votes were placed BEFORE the game had even come out, I looked at it on the 23rd and it was about 5'ish.
Just 'tards running through the games giving random low scores usually.
I read the 2 user reviews there and they're both well written.
-
Thanks Steve! It's defiantly much better than before but It good to see that it will get better.
White text around writing?!
in Combat Mission: Shock Force Tech Support
Posted
Problem fixed with reinstall. White shell cases remain but that's not a big problem.