Roter Stern

I'm actually convinced that the slow downs on bigger maps have little to do with your hardware setup - recently I upgraded from a first-gen P4 2.4GHz 1Gig RAM and nVidia6600GT-256 (which ran CMSF decently) to a Core2 Duo 3.0 4Gig RAM and SLI 8800GTS-512, and haven't noticed any significant improvement - still get the same amount of chug on large maps with lots of units as I did with the previous rig. By comparison most of the other games that I was playing on the old computer saw the frame rate double and triple with the new machine, despite now being able to run them with 16xAA Of course I'd be pretty hard pressed to name a game that has the same level of engine complexity as CMSF does, so if anything we're lucky CMSF runs at all, let alone in Real-Time But to be a bit more on-topic, I can't wait to play this PT, it looks like another gem! (Still wish I could play Hasrabit again in the mean time).

Hmm interesting... I'm also glad to hear that the system in-game is able to be deployed based on a trigger (lazing) from an enemy units the player (and his units) might not be explicitly aware of. Any comments on how effective is it against ATGMs? I'd imagine not at all against the Javelin, however a TOW and most of Red's own ATGMs it should stop dead, should it not?

Indeed. Perhaps some of the tankers can comment on this? However keep in mind that the conventional munition flight time has nothing to do with the effectiveness of this system - since if the gunner was able to acquire the target and make the shot, the smoke screen will not have any effect on the flight of the projectile. At the very best if the hit if not lethal, you might prevent an effective re-engagement and get a rough idea about the enemy's location. Also considering how (potentially) effective this system is against the MCLOS and SACLOS type ATGMs, I honestly doubt that the crews could react to every single rangefinder ping and save it for a confirmed ATGM lock/launch.

My other suggestion for improving the current QB system is to expand on the force "Type" selection. Currently there are 7 settings - from Heavy Combined to Light Infantry. If it's possible to expand those with minimal hardcore recoding, it'd be nice to see two or three dozen different settings, which will hopefully allow for greater control over the forces picked. No new UI elements would be required, just a matter of expanding the available drop-down options and adding a bit of new logic to pick the corresponding units. Basically something along the lines of: - Heavy Mech Infantry [bradly/BMP1&2] without Tank, ATGM, or Arty Support - Heavy Mech Infantry [bradly/BMP1&2] without Tank or ATGM Support, with Arty ......and all permutations in between - Heavy Mech Infantry [bradly/BMP1&2] with Tank, ATGM and Arty Support - Light Mech Infantry [stryker/BTR] without Tank, ATGM, or Arty Support .....and all permutations in between - Light Mech Infantry [stryker/BTR] with Tank, ATGM and Arty Support - Heavy Infantry [MOUT/SpecOps] without Tank, ATGM, or Arty Support .... etc ... .... etc ... Could also be tied into the "Branch" setting - Branches could differentiate between Bradly and Stryker infantry, or between Regular and Reserve Syrian infantry; where as Type could define the specifics of Tank/ATGM/Arty/IED/etc support. As a side note, since we're talking about tweaking the force generation logic - it'd be nice to have a mix of Branches... be nice to see an occasional tank or a SpecOps platoon when playing as the UNCONs ... or have a Bradley Recce element support a Stryker Company...etc Again, with any luck this can also be tied into an expanded Branches and Force Type settings. I don't want to post another one of "if there was any forsight, this should be a piece of cake" post, since Steve got a rather bitter about my last one But as someone who spend the last half-decade writing query scripts for various databases, I would just like to point out what you should never hardcode things like user selection options and instead always have them drawn from a dynamic data set ... because you know, the one time you cut a corner and do it half-arsed, that computer illiterate accountant from the next office over will come running down to have you "just add a few extra options" to the drop-down. Piece of cake to him, complete script rewrite to you

True, however I seriously doubt there's enough time to deploy a smoke screen from the time that Laser Ranger finder ping goes out and the time the trigger is pressed... and certainly not enough time to have any meaningful negative effect on the enemy's targeting performance. Lasers capable of cutting armor - not far away at all... Portable fusion reactors - not so much...

Good point about the export version... keep forgetting we don't actually have Russians as the Red Force, despite what all of my currently installed mods might suggest So how exactly does it all work in the game? Do the T-90s automatically pop smoke as soon as someone uses a range finder on them? Or is it only triggered by an Active Laser targeting? Are they still able to do it if the 'lasing' enemy unit was not previously known or visible to the tank crew? That said, I don't think there's a lot of things on the Blue side that actually use a SAL guidance ... correct me if I'm wrong, but we're only looking at Hellfires from the AH64s and Mavericks from the A10s, that's about it.

In the editor, under the "Mission" drop-down, under the "Data" tab, look for a "Force vs Force" setting. Also keep in mind that you can buy a bunch of Red units for both sides, then switch the scenario to "Blue vs Blue" and then buy a bunch of Blue units for both sides ... and you'll end up with Violet vs Violet ... also currently the only way to give the Red force some air support units.

Number One on my list - being able to load a specific map.

Here's a quick blurb from Moon: As far as the actual system, it's supposed to be comprised of two main components - the IR Jammer and an anti-Laser smoke screen. The IR Jammer is aimed at defeating missiles with an IR Homing system - by either effectively blinding the missile targeting or presenting a much larger target than just the hotspot of the engine. Supposed to work on TOW, HOT, MILAN, and Dragon -type ATGMs. What is not clear is how the system supposed to defect incoming missiles, since IR targeting doesn't actually emit anything at the target, most don't even use a range-finder. Perhaps the IR Jammer is constantly transmitting, regardless of incoming threats? There is also no indication that the IR Jammer is even modeled in the Marine module. Where as the Smoke Screen is designed to dissipate and partially reflect the Laser emissions, making it much harder for ATGMs with an active and semi-active laser guidance to find it's target. That said, not a lot of ATGMs use a laser homing system - most are areal-delivered such as Hellfire, Maverick, and the Copperhead would be the intended targets.

In the first screenshot it seems like there's a tile of regular ground to the left of a marsh tile, hence why the unit was able to move through there.

Not that much more of a guess work than with any of the current equipment

I'm sorry to say Steve, but it sounds like you guys got yourself cornered with a not very well thought-out shortcut you committed to early in development. In other words it seems that CMx2 did not turn out to be quite as universally-modular as everyone hoped it would - which also explains why you outright confirmed that cross-title support is not even on the list of possibilities. In a decent modular system the Content should be completely independent from the Game Engine - allowing changes to one to be carried out without any interference to the other. Where as from what was suggested about Normandy is that the changes to the Game Engine would have to be so dramatic, that the Content will be rendered incompatible with any of the previous versions of the Engine. In lament terms - Tigers will not be taking on T-72s. A little confused and disappointed as of late - and not even specifically due to the lack of "Tiger vs T72" battles, but because of an apparent lack of foresight from this Development.

At least they posted a new vid -

Well neither Arena nor Shtora are designed to defeat a conventional main-gun round - I'm guessing the doctrine relies on the ERA to take care of those. Shtora is designed to defeat Laser and IR guided munitions: So in theory, the IR Jammer could defeat the IR Seeker on the Javelin missile ... however, and correct me if I'm wrong, it doesn't sound like the system has the capability to detect a Javelin in flight, since it doesn't rely on an active Laser designator. Where as by contrast the Arena should be capable of defeating any incoming projectile ... within certain limitations to maximum velocity, hence most likely ruling out conventional main gun rounds: Unfortunately it doesn't sound like Arena is actually being installed on much of anything, and so it's appearance on the T-90s of CMSF is also unlikely.

So do the T90s in the Marine module have the Arena or the Shtora system?

I cant actually find any evidence that the Arena system is being installed on the T90s. Apparently the Shtora-1 system is being installed, but that's really not much more than an over glorified smokescreen launcher.

Very good point about multiple levels of command, however also consider that it takes a lot longer than a few seconds worth of mouse clicks for a battlefield commander to order a company level assault on an enemy position. Granted it would not make for an entertaining game if the players had to write battle orders and conduct platoon briefings for every single battle … that's where the line between a realistic simulation and a fun wargame is being drawn, but as a matter of compensating for that challenge the player is instead tasked with commanding several levels of leadership in the battle. The only major thing that spoils RT for me is the inability of keeping track of your unit's status without having to actively check up on them every so often. I'd like to see something introduced to be notified that "something has gone wrong" with either your units' status or order execution - at least then you can concentrate on giving orders to one of the units and still have the safety of knowing that you're not missing important action on the other side of the map. That in my mind, is without a doubt the area where WeGo is superior to RT, as far as the simulation goes.

I think this is a much better analogy to what happened in Georgia, following the rather bizarre 'spousal divorce' theme: Your spouse has been abusing one of your two children for several years, which eventually lead to a divorce - unfortunately due to a loophole in the judicial system the abusive spouse got to keep one of the children. Then several years later you catch your ex-spouse beating the living **** out of that other child … now put yourself in those shoes - would you not turn that person into a bloody mess of flesh and teeth, and then attemp to get the child away from the abusive parent, no matter what the repercussions to you might be? …I know I would.

I don't think that anyone who has this as their signature - "I humbly kneel in remembrance of the power and the glory that was the rule of Napoleon!" - has a right to criticize countries with an aggressive foreign policy. I'm not even going to point out the irony of that it was the war against Russia that finally put an end to Napoleon's several decade long campaign of slaughter.

So what you're saying is that Combat Mission is a simulation that attempts to replicate real life combat as accurately as possible - which I completely agree with. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know real life combat does not feature a infinite length pause every 60 seconds allowing commanders to get their thoughts together and orders sent out. What real life combat does feature is chaos and an unforgiving pace - requiring quick thinking, yet accurate planning from the commanders. So in other words, CMx2 RT multiplayer make a much more authentic combat simulation than CMx1 ever did.

Just an update on this issue - I'm now running an nVidia 8800GTS-512 with v177.xx drivers, and the problem has not changed any in CMSF v1.08. Changing the AA setting does not make any difference.

Honesty, no idea ... played through the full hour, and even though I cleared most of the buildings in the center of the town I ended up suffering a minor defeat - which resulted in a complete failure of the campaign - because I did not reach "Objective #1" ... what that objective was I have no idea, since the briefing was sketchy on it, at best :confused:

Is it just me or is there no objective defined for the first mission? ...makes it a little frustrating trying to figure out what and where to attack.

The z-folder should still function just as it does with vanilla-CMSF - i.e. whatever game files are located with-in the z-folder will be loaded in place of those located elsewhere. Where we will run into problems is with the new textures that the Marine module will introduce. Some of those might be used side-by-side with the modded textures installed in the z-folder, possibly producing a half-modded-half-plain look on certain models.

Oh sure... and given the massive magnitude of work required have it finally get released in 2025? No thank you