Alan8325

Ah I see. I thought ATGMs and HEAT cannon rounds were one and the same in method of penetration and this was the top line, and then the line right below it was large KE. So the second line is large KE and HEAT I guess. Shows how much I know! Are there any active defense systems in service yet? I've heard a little about the Trophy system developed in Isreal and that the U.S. is considering developing some kind of equivalent. Russia has something called Drozd, which has been around since the 80's, and something more recent called Arena-E. I'm not familiar with the capabilities of any of these and am too tired to look them up right now, but I haven't seen or heard any evidence of these systems being used, even the older ones like Drozd, so maybe they aren't effective yet.

I just looked over the British Forces manual and noticed that although the Scimitar and Spartan vehicles are equipped with slat cages their protection against HEAT is still red "X" across the board. Strykers have yellow protection with slat cages. Is the slat cage on Scimitar and Spartan just for show?

I really like the modern setting of CM:SF because it is all weaponry that we see in action today and it looks to be modeled more realistically than in any other modern-setting game. There is something I prefer about the thought "it could happen" over the thought "what if this had happened" as with WWII games. I'm really looking foward to more symmetrical modern warfare with CM:SF2. I don't really care if it is US vs. Russia or US vs. China or even if Bluefor is not the U.S., as long as the sides are symmetrical western vs. eastern equipment and training, inluding Red air power.

No backward compatibility, for example no water or bridges in CM:SF makes sense, but what about forward compatibility? For example, what if I get the CM:Bulge game and want to create a campaign that spans an entire year, including summer and winter conditions? I know the engine is capable of summer conditions in western Europe because of CM:Normandy already being released and now I have winter conditions with CM:Bulge so why doesn't CM:Bulge have the ability to do both? It's not like I'm trying to bring an M1A2 SEP from CM:SF into Normandy 1944 or something like that.

What about air forces? Would a realistic war between the U.S. and Russia or China still reach a point early in the war where the U.S. achieves total air superiority? Somehow I think the U.S. places so incredibly much importance on air superiority that it is willing to spend the entire U.S. GDP to achieve it, if needed. On the other hand, recent shifts in projected military expeditures away from air superiority assets like the F-22 add a little more credibility to symmetrical air forces in a future large-scale conflict. It would be nice to have a CMSF 2 where both sides have air support though, even if the truth is bent just a little.

Every time I see one of these videos the targets do not seem to be aware that they are being fired at until the first round impacts. Usually the spread of impacts is so wide that the enemy are able to scatter once the first round hits and the Apache gunner must then hunt them down one or two at a time. This video, however, shows some very accurate grouping that did not give anyone time to move an inch.

There are many videos online of the Apache's 30mm cannon in use, but I found this video showing it especially devastating and accurate. The 30mm rounds fired in this video look like they have very low velocity, more like 40mm grenades from a Mk19. Is this just an illusion? At least the cat got away! http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=190518&page=1

Also sabots tend to demolish everything inside an armored vehicle once they come through the side anyway, but I was referring to the hypothetical IF I am ok and the equipment seems to be too. Looks like fun! Sounds like in the beginning they are using both the .50 and the M240.

Here is a new video of Armed Assault 2 with TrackIr 5 in use and I must say it looks pretty cool. I've never played Operation Flashpoint or Armed Assault, but I heard they are among the more realistic shooters. I am leaning towards getting either ArmA2 or the new Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising, or both, but the vehicles in both titles look like they might be a little gamey as far as simulation is concerned. I'm not sure about OFP: DR, but I know ArmA2 vehicles use a (IMO outdated) hitpoint system where even small repeated hits to non-vital areas on a vehicle will eventually bring down the global health and make it blow up. It would be nice to see an armor vs. penetration system similar to CMx2's in games like these.

Depends on how much more danger it looks like I'm in if I go outside I guess. Also depends on how much more I think I can accomplish in my vehicle despite the hole, and maybe I took out whatever shot me. As long as there's no danger of chemical, biological or radiological contaminants coming through that hole and everything onboard still works, I might as well keep going! But what about a shot-up pickup truck with all the tires flat and nobody inside? At what point do I stop shooting at it?

One of the tactical changes required when using Marines, that I learned the hard way, is that you generally want to dismount sooner when going into urban, or other complex, environments. The marine squad is larger and so are the transports, such as AAV and MTVR. Also the transports are generally less well armored than Strykers and Bradleys. This means that it is helpful to dismount and split the squads into teams early when the terrain ahead is complex. It was only the second mission in the Marines campaign, after version 1.11, where I discovered the vulnerability of fully-loaded AAVs rolling too close to the enemy before dismounting. You know the old saying "can't hit the broad side of a barn"? Well if you CAN hit the broad side of a barn, remember that the AAV is really no different than a barn on tracks.

In the case of my own vehicles getting knocked out, I've looked at the damage panel after seeing a vehicle get hit and noticed that every component has at least a light-green cross status and no crew casualties, but then the circle under the vehicle turns red and the crew bails out. How does the vehicle damage system determine knock-outs then? It isn't based on too many components damaged or crew members taken out, right? Also, it seems that too much small-arms ammo is sometimes spent destroying dismounted technicals, especially those at a distance. I've seen squads expend half their ammo on a distant dismounted technical. In the case of a pickup truck with a machine gun on the back, an immobilization (engine or wheels) seems like it should be considered a knock-out unless the gun itself has to be destroyed too. Perhaps lower the "threat" posed by vehicles known to be dismounted?

Most (arcadey) FPS games have weapon lethality and accuracy severely reduced from realistic levels to make the firefights take place at 10-15m distance and allow jumping around to avoid being hit for more of an arcade experience. I remember multiple instances while playing Battlefield 2 where I easily sneak up behind someone for an ambush and manage to get several rounds into his back, only to have him jump up, spin around in mid-air and strafe side-to-side, gunning me down in no time. Those kids and their reflexes!

I use a sound mod called "AKD Sound Mod," found in the repository on this website. Almost all sounds in the game are replaced, which makes many weapons sound more powerful. Realistic or not, I find the sounds much more immersive, especially the ak-74's, PK machine guns, 40mm grenades and syrian hand grenades.

Yeah, and the description of the M6-895 mortar says that it is replacing the 51mm mortar and is currently in service in Afghanistan. Also of note is that it can be used in the direct and indirect fire roles, unlike the 51mm which is mostly direct. I think we will have to wait until after CM: Normandy before we get on-map mortars that are capable of indirect fire in a CMx2 game, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=333cImJqOfY&feature=related http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RKG-3_anti-tank_grenade I know this video is 2 years old but it shows pretty good footage of HEAT grenades in action. The grenades being used in the video are Russian-built RKG-3 anti-tank grenades. Has anybody heard of these being used in Iraq? I think it would be pretty cool to see these added to the Syrian arsenal in CMSF, possibly in one of the upcoming modules. I remember someone on these forums saying that when considering a new feature for the game, the gameplay outcome must be weighed against the time and effort of adding the feature. This seems like it would be easy to add. Is this a weapon that is relevent in a conventional war? Could it be used effectively by conventional army forces or would its very short range limit its effectiveness to those dressed as civilans against occupation forces, as shown in the video?

When the M4 icon of a crew member disappears it means that he is currently operating one of the vehicle weapons. You can see which one he is operating by mousing over the field where the M4 icon used to be and it will show the name of the weapon, for example "M2HB."

About the Syria setting, it really makes no difference from an equipment and maybe training standpoint what middle-eastern country or terrorist faction is the antagonist in this game. The game includes almost all generic Russian military export equipment that potential or current U.S. opponents, other than Russia itself or China, would have. If you prefer Iran as the bad guy, mod in some Iranian uniform and vehicle skins and there you have it, Iran as the bad guy with all its toys. If you want Al-Qaida or Taliban, the already included unconventional units and equipment pretty much already cover it.

Could two of the ammo bars represent AP and HE rounds for the M230 chaingun? Can the pilot even switch ammo types in mid-air?

I can also confirm this in SP real-time with the .50. I don't think I've seen it with mk 19. Every time it happens it seems to be right after a frame-rate drop in the action. It doesn't bother me much as it doesn't seem to affect the gameplay as of yet, other than the frame-rate drop.

In reading a couple of threads on the idea of a metacampaign, I'd like some clarification on what it actually is. From what I understand, it is a similar gameplay structure as in the Total War series of games (medieval, rome, empires etc.), where there is a strategic layer that allows you to move units across large distances to capture territory, then the game moves to a tactical layer to resolve individual battles. In this case, the CMSF battles that we play now would be the tactical layer and you are trying to add a strategic (or operational) layer? If so, this sounds like a great idea as it would add strategic meaning to each of the battle outcomes. Rather than just move on to the next battle or have to replay the previous one, there is a consequence that is right in front of me on the strategic map. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with!

Yes, nobody 'won' anything, except for increased support among their own people. Hamas support among Palestinians is stronger than ever, as is the support for Israeli lawmakers involved in the offensive by Israeli citizens. International support seems to be split in support of Israel and Hamas by Western and Arab countries, respectively, and as always. Unfortunately this probably paves the way for more intense fighting in the future.

Of course Isreal did not remove Hamas or their ability to launch rockets, but I would not go as far as to call it a defeat for Isreal as that implies that Hamas was somehow victorious. That is, however, unless you call hundreds of Hamas including leaders killed, hundreds of Palestinian civilians killed while Hamas uniformed police and leaders hide, thousands more wounded and squalid conditions compared to the West Bank even before the IDF attack a victory, then yes, Hamas was victorious!

Try playing as the Syrians and watching your BMP's get chewed up by 40mm grenades, while at the same time not being able to see anything until either the crew bails out or the BMP blows up.

I just noticed that, although I can see what the actual munition looks like for most weapons in the game for taking close-up screen-shots, the artillery and air support munitions are generic yellow streaks no matter how far I zoom in. Is there a mod that puts these 3d models in? It would be kind of cool to see Hellfire missiles and 500lb bombs actually there.