Lethaface

If you look on the right there is a rise behind the house too. The effect we see is just 3d watched in 2d ;-). Edit: nice shots BTW

@Bozowans Nice! Nice charge by the AI. I remember this mission, afaik my troops were moving towards the town along the road when they picked up the sound contacts.

AFAIK there is no 'ready round' concept in CM.

Enjoying those Tiger 1's?

Interesting! Might indeed be an explanation for some other strange things (like the dutch radio's), which were reported to be fixed earlier.

As long a one uses it like this, it's a great asset IMO. Also in urban terrain. Have it hide behind some buildings close by your infantry. When a target is known, give it a shoot and scoot orders. For overwatch duties it is generally also fine against infantry, but it can certainly be overpowered by things like a .50 on a jeep if it opens up first.

Well, things change. After CMFI R2V 'One road too much' (they still ended up in Rome though), I guess a more simple project would be a nice challenge for a change .

AFAIK lod is a generic term for 'level of detail' for 3d models, whereas the closer by the model is rendered, the higher the LOD level. Not sure if 1 is highest or lowest whatever.

Nobody else have the c2 / radio problem with the dutch forces?

Thanks all for the effort of updating this campaign! One thing I noticed in the first mission is that the dutch infantry platoons (still) don't seem to have radio's on them and thus are out of c2 when outside of their vehicles. Both the recce HQ and the inf platoon hq's (at least the one in the YPR's, didn't check the CV-90 borne yet) seem to not have any radio carried on them. As we all know, maintaining c2 is an important aspect of the game so this does have some impact. Or am I missing something? Afaik there was an issue with this in CMSF2 which was supposed to be fixed a while back.

He could always use the 'surrender' option in the menu Although I guess that he had plans for another part of his forces? I see the issue here. Anyway, not sure why the platoon didn't surrender apart from the last man. In my experience everything apart from fanatical troops surrenders when taking severe casualties and against overwhelming odds. Perhaps they were just cowering down from your intense fires and you had nobody close? It's hard to surrender to incoming HE ;-P.

On the previous page Mos stated "I have no idea what it takes programming wise to make it all work. ", to which you replied "Frankly, it is not that hard...". Look it up if you don't believe me. If you were in fact referring to 'manipulating' XML, it wasn't at all clear from that post (apart from maybe yourself) as it was a direct reply to the required 'programming to make it all work'. Anyway, I think I made my point. No offense meant in any way :).

"IT" is the feature of exporting the results of a battle some sort of structured way, allowing it to be edited relatively easily outside the scope of CM and importing it back into the CM editor in some sort of way. At least, that's what I understood you and others were talking about. Surely, it's an interesting feature also from my perspective. However, stating that 'it' is 'frankly not that hard', based of your experience with some xml scripting / 'manipulating' as a lawyer, is rather 'ill informed' if I may call it that. You do indicate you're a lawyer and thus perhaps not the ideal candidate to make informed assertions about the difficulty of implementing a feature in software. The only people really in the know to make such predictions are the ones that designed the application and work in it regularly. The realities of software development mean that even their estimations will often be quite far off on the too optimistic scale.

Without knowing anything about the CMx2 architecture, the difficulty is not to dump/export stuff to any structured format like xml or json whatever. The question is whether the dataset even exists in a consistent state at one time, allowing it to be dumped integrally. It might be quite a lot of work and or overhead to insert this logic at all required places and not creating other problems because of this new functionality. At the same time, because of the info on the endscreen and the fact that campaign carry over functionality does exist, one can imagine that the exact data is already neatly available and could indeed be relatively easily be exported (and of course an import interface is also necessary). And than perhaps they have other reasons not to desire this type of functionality for their product. Edit: concluding that it's not so hard is, in my opinion, plainly wrong. And I do have a professional background with regards to the subject matter

Have you checked things like mailchimp? They do require you to sort of make a new list, but from there allows you to send large batches (mailchimp handles sending the mails). I had good experience with them, although it must have been back in 2010 orso.

One small strange thing I noticed but forgot to mention is that the Sherman Kangaroo under the single vehicle tab, has a rather large crew (~7 men) and is thus not really useful as an APC, since most of the seats are occupied by the crew and armed with only pistols. When selected through the 'Armored Personnel group' (orso), the Sherman Kangaroo comes with a more expected crew of 2 and does function as an APC I was also looking for kangaroo variants for the Canadians, but couldn't find any. Is that correct? The manual explicitly mentions the Canadians first employed the 'kangaroo idea' on a large scale, but perhaps they just used them in the ETO?

IIRC the bow mg is occupied by the scout team passengers (if they are onboard), the gunner is sitting in the .50 / observation seat. I think that's just how they roll, but I'm not really in the know.

enjoy!

Great! I just ordered R2V, although my order is still 'processing'. I got mails but no download link. Not sure if I had that before, used PayPayl. Guess it will resolve itself sooner or later ;-). Enjoy! Edit: nevermind, saw the other thread. downloading now!

@Oleksandr, thanks for the Mod!

Thanks, I have it already just tried the link to see if it works for me

@BFCElvis I get an invalid link too (chrome). It offers a link to go back to 'sign in', perhaps the link only works if signed in?

Looking great! Thanks @BFCElvis

Some screenshots from @Liveload @Aurelius revised Kabani scenario: The hilly landscape provides not only nice scenery, but interesting tactical options as well Ideal terrain for the provided T-90SA and T-72 Turms-Ts, although enemy ATGM especially can ruin the party: Recon: Moving to firing positions Ready to dominate: Assault force moving up: House to house fighting It's available here:

(Software) product development isn't like an assembly line. Of course, we all try to create assembly line teams with agile, scrum, kanban, scrum kanban, devops, They can quite work good too. Instead, imo, product development is more like inventing something. It's difficult to know the 'moment supreme' beforehand. It's conceptually like designing a scenario. How long does it take? Well, that depends. Probably your estimation beforehand will be quite different from the actual total elapsed time when it is ready and available on scenario depot. Doing things like that professionally doesn't magically change that process, so that you now do know beforehand exactly how long it will take. Of course, your estimations will get better with experience. But it will always remain a ballpark figure, and at times just plain wrong. So, if those communicated 'dates' aren't met, that doesn't necessarily mean that it is a wise thing to actually focus on 'accelerating' the development process. Maybe that's just not a feasible thing, in the specific context (because of costs, complexity, whatever). It might also be possible that acceleration just takes a very long time before benefits can be seen. It all depends on the product, the team, the initial investment behind it, etc etc. I too would like to see more content quicker. Patch 4 took a long time. But most important is that they are still delivering and from what I can tell, will keep delivering in the future. That's the most important. 'Accelerating'?, well I guess i've said enough.