Jump to content

meade95

Members
  • Posts

    481
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by meade95

  1. Why is it every time I go to post on the forums here...When I log in... I give my Username and password....I then get the routine message "thank you for logging in MEADE95..blah, blah wait here or click here"...

    Yet them immediately I'm sent right back to the starting log in screen? This happens 3 or 4 times and then I come here to the forums click refresh several times...and whallla I can finally post....

    Also, why do we need 2 seperate usernames for here and the Respository??

    Lastly, just went to purchase NATO and no matter what combination (I only have ever had the 2 required usernames and I keep the same password for both)...neither allow me to place my order....If I go to set up a new account...I'm told my email address (which yes, is one of my usernames) is currently already used...

    Frustrating nonethe less......

    back to ARMA/OA

  2. Am I the only person who thinks the article referenced reeks of inference and bias? Casualty rates based on Hezbollah public funerals, Lebanese comments about "shooting rubber bullets at women and children and the resurrection of the AT-3 as a wonder weapon destroying MBT's. All of the above may be correct but where is the evidence for such claims, I was looking forward to an analytical piece, given the posts content, not inferred arguments, based on quotes gathered from secondary and much used quotes and 'sources'.

    I do not intend to start an interminable IDF evil/IDF good 'debate' but the piece failed to address the real issues that caused the IDF's poor performance in 2006, factors that I doubt would be replicated by a US attacker (poor logistics, poor Opsec and the use of reserve troops etc). Perhaps if the CMSF scenarios featured thirsty and hungry National Guard soldiers with little or no FIBU training; walking into village ambushes, where their ROE precludes being able to flatten dug in forces then yes the results might be similar to SF's invasion scenario.

    The summary of the Winograd report can be found here in this NYT report showing the systemic failings of the IDF.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/world/middleeast/31winograd-web.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

    +1.........

  3. You could fabricate a tent out of bus shelters. I have importuned BFC to swap in a colored awning to fabricate a storefront/market, to no avail alas. BFC seems to feel they have enough flavor objects in the game. Pity.

    What has BFC added in that was customer driven / requested within CMSF?? Outside of what BFC wanted to implement from the start with CMSF?

    I'm just curious?

  4. In playtesting my Ramadi scenarios I'm finding the vulnerability of US infantry to small arms fire to be just about right actually.

    ....

    Really? I still think from all I have read, numerous books (along with a family member that served, in Ramadi, actually) that in CCQ engagements red KIA on U.S. is slightly high in terms of small arms fire....and certainly RPGs accuracy is.

  5. Why not set up CMSF to at least be able to run random patrols (within a given area). This area could be placed by the designer .....and then whatever units you give a patrol order to would by synced within whichever zone you place them into. They would then randomly patrol that zoned area (could be part of a city, for example).

  6. With that said, I think it would be nice to have a new unit experience level added either above "Elite" or somewhere lower and then bump up the capabilities of "Elite." This way, players could have the option to add some really absurdly tough units in the game if they want to, to at least simulate the level of training that SOF operators have.

    This is what I've been thinking / requesting for sometime - Something along these lines - It would not be hard to implement at all (as the base of what makes up Recruit - Elite) are already in place.

    It would allow for quite more out of CMSF just by this slight change alone.

  7. It's not about hard or complicated due to technical issues, rather it's due to legal and ownership issues. Presumably Snowball owns the rights to the models they created, why would they freely give away their hard work to be used in someone else's game?

    Well, perhaps don't use Snowballs than - Though, I would wonder if BFC would have the final ownership over all said material within the new Astan mod/game (whatever it exactly is).

    My point being, I've been surprised by the lack of differing units (cosmetic only) for the UI (for both Blue and Red). Which makes me believe it must be more complicated than with most other games. In that to date, with the various Astan user made missions that have already been put out....that we haven't seen such cosmetic only modded Astan looking units to be shown on the UI representing / depicting them.

  8. True, regarding the unit type being completely independent of the units skill/experience. I think a broader point is that even "elite" level snipers at times aren't all that effective. Be it with shooting accuarcy, spotting or ability to stay conceled from view.....(with this said, I never want my comments to be taken out of context or in a manner in which it seems I'm only complaining about CMSF. As that is not my intent or complete thoughts regarding CMSF). In total this SIM is the best out on the market today....

  9. Sniper Teams in CMSF can be frustrating - They have lower accuracy than would be suspected / hoped for / realism - But there are probably some balance issues here along with map size issues (as for why). Do snipers even carry silenced weapons in CMSF?

    I do believe sniper Teams should be given some type of tweak in terms of concelment (defensive) as well as in terms of spotting capabilities. Silenced weapons Snipers should also be moddled for MOUNT Ops (but I don't believe they are).

    They do run out of ammo quick. This is true. Need to load them up, before sending them out.

×
×
  • Create New...