Alan8325
-
Posts
583 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Alan8325
-
-
Great DAR and video footage! Agreed that BMP-3 should have used 30mm against the dismounted AT team in the trees. Anyone know the real-life target types for the useage of 100mm vs 30mm? I would think 30mm would be preferred against close to intermediate range dismounted infantry due to the ability to sustain suppression and suppress a wider area. A particularly brutal series would be 30mm bursts followed by a 100mm HE shot!
-
I haven't been very active around here lately, but since this thread has resurfaced I figured I'd poke my nose out of my hole to throw out an idea.
I've got a scenario built and essentially ready to go. Historical map (right down to using the 1947 French aerial survey maps), semi-historical circumstances (correct date and units, at least in a broad sense), tested and balanced for H2H. Mixed forces on both sides, attacker in reinforced battalion strength. Now that the vehicle pack is out I may add a smattering of new units just for fun (nothing to fundamentally change things).
What I'm wondering, purely for experimental purposes, is if people would pay a nominal sum (like $0.99) to download it. The reason is not to get rich quick (obviously) but to see if people feel more invested in it if they've, well, invested in it. Over and over I've read comments about users downloading scenarios and forgetting about them, thus making them less likely to provide feedback - maybe a token pay-to-play system would change this. People certainly seem willing to complain on these forums when they don't like some aspect of CM, and many also offer positive comments as well (though the ratio favors the former, it would seem). I can't help but wonder if paying for the product contributes to this, and, if so, if such responsiveness would carry over to paid-for scenarios.
You could post a Bitcoin address for tips. I'm not sure how many CM players are familiar with Bitcoin, much less actually have any, but I'm one who has some and would gladly tip for a scenario I like. Perfect place to put a Bitcoin address is in the design notes of your scenario briefing. Bonus points for pasting a barcode so that all I have to do is scan it with my phone and send your way 0.0025 Bitcoin ($0.99 at current rates).
Of course ask BFC if they would mind first.
-
Perhaps in a future module BFC will dip their toe into paramilitary militia forces. For both sides. Then there are no rules to follow for weapons purchases. I recall mujahideen in CM:Afghanistan were equipped with everything from AR-15s to FN FAL to PPSh to old Enfields. 'Modern war' could represent American gun show purchases by the belligerents.
I certainly hope so. It allows for much more creativity with units and equipment on BFC's end and with scenario design on our end. The Uncons were probably my favorite faction to play in CMSF. They were generic enough that they could represent any unconventional force that you might dream up or that exists in the real world, such as ISIS. Uncons in CMBS could be designed so that they can represent any eastern European insurgents or 'vacationing' Russian soldiers.
-
I believe it's an already existing system, called Trophy, that is currently deployed by the Israeli armed forces but not yet by US forces. Another possibility is that it's a not yet deployed US-built system that is similar to the Israeli "Iron Fist" system.
The difference is that "Trophy" is like a shotgun, spraying buckshot towards the incoming projectile and "Iron Fist" or equivalent is like a grenade launcher with grenade that airbursts next to the incoming projectile. Iron Fist is also similar to the Russian "Arena" in that it can knock out KE rounds better than the shotgun-like Trophy. Only reason I suspect it will be Trophy is that it is mentioned on the Battlefront Black Sea page and Iron Fist is not.
In either case, the game's inclusion of the system on US vehicles is a projection rather than a reflection of current state. The equipment already exists and is proven, however, so I don't personally believe that it's getting into Space Lobster territory.
-
I think its not in the game, like so many other engine features that would be needed to really simulate modern combat (2017).
For me BS is a Vehicle Pack (reskin) to SF.
...waiting for CMx3...
CMBS will have multiple huge improvements over CMSF, judging from what I've seen so far. LOS from extended sensors is something that will have to be tackled sooner or later for the modern theater games. Otherwise, ATGM and recon vehicles will be pretty eye-candy that decorate a protected corner of scenarios they are included in.
-
It seems counter battery fire can be done with what we've already seen in screenshots and features revealed so far. We have seen screenshots of on-map vehicle mounted mortars and we know that there will be UAV surveillance capabilities. That sounds like all I need for counter battery fire.
Having said that, I'm not sure I want to use on-map artillery assets anymore! Give me the invincible off-map ones, please.
-
They seem to be pretty conservative about adding "soon to be deployed" equipment, which is good. I wouldn't be against adding some of the more questionable stuff in a future "funnies" unit pack however. It would make for some fun "what if" scenarios.
-
Yep, ATGM and scout vehicles with top sensors will be some of the least popular quick battle units if they don't get this one right.
-
9M123 Khrizantema was designed to deal with current western MBTs such as the M1A2. Either it works as advertised or it doesn't. Unfortunately (fortunately) real life Abrams haven't come up against such weapons to guide simulation of their effectiveness.
-
Biggest issue with lethality right now is the Abrams. In truth, it is a deathwagon, and is very hard to kill, especially with APS added to it.
Knowing this, the Russians would probably do their best to deal with these with artillery and air attacks at the operational level, before we get to a CM-like scenario. Precision artillery, guided missiles launched from aircraft and mines would be the anti-Abrams weapons of choice. Of course they wouldn't necessarily be successful and the U.S. would probably ensure it has air superiority before sending Abrams formations, but Black Sea scenario designers have plenty of realistic "the Abrams' didn't make it" situations to use as back story for balanced scenarios.
-
Not necessarily a tall mast. The LRAS on top of a Humvee should be able to see over a hill without exposing the vehicle. ATGM vehicles usually have sensors higher up as well. It will be rough using the AT-5 launcher on top of a BMP or BRDM if the vehicle must expose itself enough to let LOS be drawn from the vehicle center. Still looking forward to the game if this can't be fixed though.
-
In CMSF there was an issue with mast-mounted sensors not providing any advantage in hull-down positions due to an engine limitation with LOS needing to come from the center of a vehicle or something like that. I remember it being described as a hard problem to fix. I think it is probably worth the effort in the modern theater though. Can anyone verify whether this will or will not be fixed by initial release?
-
Agreed that it would be better to just allow these units to jog short distances. Maybe only remove "fast" for heavy equipment.
-
In version 3.10 with the Vehicle Pack, units carrying heavy equipment like flamethrowers or mortar ammo now do not have the "Fast" or "Quick" commands available when selected on their own. I noticed that they can, however, move "Fast" and "Quick" when group selected with a unit that is capable of these movements on its own.
Since it can be useful to move a flamethrower or other such weighed-down unit quickly over a short distance of exposed terrain, such as between two buildings, I found it helpful to group select it with a small light unit like a scout detachment. At first I thought this was a bug and posted in the tech report section but now I believe that it's an intentional discrepancy designed to simulate nearby units helping carry heavy equipment. It actually makes perfect sense.
-
Looks familiar. You forgot to target smoke first though.
-
Since the vehicle pack does not have scenarios or campaigns, it would be a great idea for there to be a sticky post on the forum specifically for links to user made scenarios and campaigns that take advantage of the vehicle pack content.
-
I started reading the first few thread and thought? What the @@@@, is Putin playing the BETA?
He is, and Ukraine is AFK.
-
I'm playing the German campaign right now and those zis-2 57mm AT guns are frickin lasers. Always seem to get first round hits on my tanks, even when they are moving.
-
It's good to see more reviewers look past graphics to see the advanced game mechanics making for a complex but rewarding game. One of the other games I find myself playing a lot lately is Cortex Command, which is a modern game that has 2d graphics making it look like an early 90's game. Under the hood however, it has advanced physics that can bring even modern computers to their knees. Not mine though.
Needless to say, Cortex Command got mediocre reviews from the major reviewers that praise flashy games like Call of Duty. -
Balaclavas are likely not going to be the norm for normal operations. The Crimean invasion was obviously (laughably) covert. Unfortunately, I think we'll have our answer on this question in 2-3 days
Steve
Any chance of a special forces/unconventional expansion with these guys? Uncons were my favorite in CMSF because they could represent any insurgent faction.
-
All a bit flawed really because you're working off the assumption that the game will portray events that are happening right now. Given that BF's announcement about the setting preceded these events and the fact that the modern title that we now know as CMSF was set in a fictional Syrian setting to steer clear of ongoing conflicts, I wouldn't infer too much about what is going on now in relation to how the game may look.
The back story doesn't really matter but the environment and units should be modeled as realistically as possible. I'm sure we will see lots of user-made scenarios and campaigns based on real life events. It would be pretty interesting to see a Ukraine defense of Crimea campaign depicting a hypothetical Ukrainian attempt at actually using force to deplete Russian forces taking over Crimea.
-
I found this image of alleged current defensive positions on Crimea. It could be a good starting point for scenario designers.
-
Any chance for Linux support with the coming title(s)? On a related note, has anyone tried running a CMx2 game in Linux Wine?
-
No the next "big one" will be fought with economics and trade agreements. The majority will just shut out the troublemaker and he will wither on the vine. It just has to get bad enough for the majority to come together and see the need.
Until "nations" don't have that much say in the matter anymore. There is a trend towards decentralized information access with developments such as mesh networks, satellite Internet service providers and new trans-ocean cables bypassing the US. Decentralized and unsanctionable currencies/stores of value such as Bitcoin will make international sanctions difficult or impossible to enforce. 3d printing will decentralize manufacturing of most things including metal and chemical products. Solar power and battery technology is coming down enough in cost that it's increasingly possible to live "off grid" with full power. This is definitely bad for authoritarian regimes.
The one thing that nations have going for them is increasing surveillance capabilities. I don't believe the next "big one" will even be between nations at all, but between nations and non-nation groups with shared interest.
Tanks A Thing Of The Past?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Things will get really interesting when cheap hardware (sensors, processors, etc.) and continuously improving open-source designs mean the layman can make guided missiles in his garage. Free image recognition software can already allow cameras to be programmed to move to follow something like a human face. Rockets are already produced in the garages of Gaza residents by Hamas and its supporters. Put some of these things together and make the plans freely available and guided missiles could be as ubiquitous as the cheap quadcopter drones seen today. I have no doubt that we will see the AK-47 of guided missiles soon.