Lethaface

But we are given A-10, F-16 and other planes which have precision optical guided munitions (Mavericks). I'm not arguing that a pilot from a Corsair going on a bomb run would be able to ID his targets, but CMCW also features planes with at least the ability to lock on a AFV sized target. Or more specifically, they are able to do that in CMCW. In CMCW AFAIK all US HQs are able to call in airstrikes, in 13 min. If the intent is to limit that capability, why not limit ingame ability to call in airstrikes to air controllers like for USSR? If it's not a 'strike box' / 'fire zone', than what is the 700m area target in CMCW representing? Inside those area's planes will strike random targets, including friendly troops. I'm not necessarily disagreeing on what would be historically accurate but the ingame implementation. I don't really get why the 'box' should max be 700m circle max vs for example a 1.5km rectangle. If such are considered outside of CM scope, I'd say the area targets shouldn't be in at all. But we are given tools like A-10 with Maverick missiles on free hunt in a 700m circle fire zone, in battles spanning several KMs of maneuver. So we can actually do the unrealistic stuff, although with a handicap. Sort of feels like being given a Ferrari (I imagine, never happened to me unfortunately) but not being allowed to go beyond 3.000 rpm in 2nd gear.

I can believe that, not an expert myself but given the occurrences of friendly fire incidents I can fully 'grasp' why. However given the maps, missions and the fact we do have fixed wing available in game anyway, I'd say that keeping the area targets the current size isn't perse a better fit for realism and imo definitely not for playability. In CMSF IIRC helicopter area-targets used to be rather large and often could span the whole 'enemy zone' of the map. Not sure about fixed wing and whether area-targets for either have been adjusted between CMSF2 and CMCW. Given CMCW map sizes and more mobile and more full spectrum warfare, it can be difficult to effectuate the order on the lines of 'engage enemy forces behind hill X or moving along road Y, towards Z'. So I know where the enemy approximately is, or which direction they will move and where the friendly zone starts, but not really have the means to tell the planes what I want. Or more precise, I can only give them a very small area to target on the scale of the battle. Whereas if I was the pilot in the A-10 I imagine I'd be scanning for targets on the axis instructed and in the vicinity of the established coordinates (if given an area target instead of a fixed target). I'd be surprised if that zone could be as small as 500x500m or whatever the current max size is. Having larger target area's would perhaps not be ideal in all circumstances either. But IMO will, given the current compromise already established, allow for more meaningful player control of airstrikes which doesn't directly lead to much more unrealistic effects compared to the status quo. And indeed something like the linear strike for drones could be a way to do it, with the planes engaging stuff in the vicinity of that line so player control is still limited.

Fair points regarding the quick adjust, although I agree with Stardekk that the 'attack area' could be be larger. Or perhaps having the option like a linear strike, as now it can be quite a challenge to choose the area especially for preplanned strikes or when targeting moving units along a road / axis.

Maybe I'm blind, but I couldn't find any 'cluster' options for the USA artillery in QBs.

nice song, but had you kept it to 4 o 5 times references the guy nobody would have said nuthin. So, there's 5 so let's now continue with CM youtube videos.

Lol, not taken as one ;-). I think it's a fair comment regarding the 'maldeployment', although at the same time it would be interesting to see how that would play out in CMCW.

They fear being inundated!

18MB/s here, but 2.3MB/s isn't that slow I'd say

Although on the 5th+ time it worked and it is downloading now with good speed.

same here.

?

never mind.

You can answer your own ?, if you go back to think that you have been making comments for years about someone saying some words about other people on youtube. Other people can defend themselves fine plus it's a word, which VET0369 tried to explain, others use in a less serious tone you seem to interpret it. Plus, mate, it's 2021. move on

nothing probably, but nothing wrong with Winrar either. A mouseclick is free so the add isn't an issue, I've been using it for over a decade if not two and never got a license lol.

Good. Updating almost always works if re-downloading doesn't fix things Yeah I think I misread the error message. In the past I have used winzip like software which opens archives like a directory structure in explorer, so it would be confusing whether you're actually in the archive or the extracted folder. I thought that might be an explanation for the error message if updating didn't fix it.

I think you have installed the game under admin permissions, and or made changes to the permissions for the default user? I'd try reinstalling it with your normal user or running as admin.

Camera shake for explosions nearby. Try alt-c.

That's the AI taking out one of my M-60A3 TTS. In CMSF2 I've never actually see these vehicles make a successful battlefield kill. It didn't survive for long though, obviously.

Actually, I think that you are trying to open the setup file with winrar. I guess you already extracted it? Because that what's the message says, you can't open a file of 'installer' type as an 'archive', or in other words winrar expects a .rar but you are trying to open the installer as an archive.

You have the latest winrar? Winrar worked for me (5.4 64bit on windows 10).

I checked, same here.

Somebody had to create the thread. No complaints about the Dragon or M60A3 TTS yet

double post