Guinnessman

An apt, but also strangely disturbing phrase....I just can't stop visualising what that would actually look like....

Hi all, just a minor clarification: when talking about mercenaries, people always seem to drag the Ghurkas into it. Gurkhas aren't mercenaries. They swear an oath of loyalty to the British crown, and are an integrated part of the British army. Several members of my family have served with them, and rate them very highly. Just to clarify!

Maybe not mate, my PC is pretty old (bought in 2005 when it was pretty decent) and I reckon it could handle CMSF. As it happened, I've just upgraded the graphics board to one of the aforementioned 8800 GTS and it flies now - didn't even need to upgrade the power supply, which kind of surprised me. Pretty reasonably priced too. Incidentally, I've not yet had any issues with the Nvidia graphics drivers and any of my current games....hope thats the same for CMSF! Kept my old graphics card just in case though, I will not be denied!

I'm pretty sure the Russians have artillery rounds with anti-armour submunitions...I seem to recall reading something about the Smersh MLRS having a warhead which fired guided submunitions. That'd probably do the trick.

That is quite possibly the coolest thing I've ever heard of happening in computer game. It totally outdoes my squad of British Para's throwing a grenade straight into the open top of a German half-track during the Arnhem campaign in CMBO...

IIRC this was partially due to the fact that the IDF concentrated on airpower instead of a decent quantity of tube artillery. So when their airpower was nullified over Egyptian positions by the air defences, they didn't have enough field artillery to adequately suppress the ATGM teams. It was a pretty smart move by the Egyptians right enough...

Indeedy. The A2 is supposedly a hell of a lot better though(never handled one myself right enough, they were just phasing them into service when I left). Still doesn't resolve the problem of it's weight and the fact that it's a pain in the nether regions to clean.

I don't think it was the first test, but a subsequent one. IIRC in the first test the SA80 was compared with the M16, Steyr AUG, and a few other rifles. The tests were to measure the MRBF (mean Rounds Before Failure) and the SA80 didn't do well at all. They re-did the tests, but changed the definition of what a 'failure' constituted. I think they also had REME armourers actually at the ranges during the tests, and they were checking each weapon every time it suffered a stoppage, which totally defeated the point of determing how well the weapon would work out in the field. End result was that the SA80 managed to pass, though even then it was a close thing. I've been hunting for the website that chronicled it all, made for very illuminating and somewhat depressing reading.

Well, I am a newbie here,but I'll take an admittedly ill-educated stab at answering your questions. One of the demos for CMSF shows US troops firing three round bursts with their M4's, so I would say yeah, you will get to see different rates of fire. Taking a stab in the dark here, but I'd say that the TacAI will decide what fire mode to use - leaving it up to the player would probably be too micromanagerial (is that even a real word? ). Taking another stab in the dark, I doubt weapon jams will come into it. Again, too into the nitty gritty for a game that's aiming to represent company-sized actions. Re troops firing on full auto - have to say that I've never seen US troops fire in bursts from M4's/M16's in footage from Iraq/Afghanistan (which might just mean I'm not observant enough). Seen a lot of rapid firing on semi, but no bursts. From my own (limited) experience with the British army, full auto fire is tightly regulated, and only really approved of in certain circumstances, namely anti-ambush drill, short-range suppresive fire, and CQB (even then short bursts). It's just a waste of ammo otherwise, and best left to weapons like the SAW and GPMG/M240 which are, after all, designed with the purpose of blatting away on full-auto. Our battle drills tended to concentrate on rapid fire (roughly one round every two seconds) or deliberate fire (one round every six seconds). You're also taught to count the number of rounds fired as best you can - not easy to do when on full auto. My 2 pence, though I'm sure the more experienced (and indeed still serving) members can confirm/support the above (or totally blow it out of the water if necessary!)

Which ones? </font>

Isn't THAT the truth. The Ministry of Defence here in the UK is exactly the same. Just look at all the fudged test results for the SA80....

Thanks very much for the responses guys! Cheers for the explanation of the high ammo expenditure in CMx1 Steve, does make a lot more sense now. Hadn't really thought about it that way before

Hi all, I've been lurking around this forum for a good while now, so thought I'd register and join y'all (though I have to admit the breadth of mliitary knowledge displayed in these forums is truly intimidating at times!) I've pre-ordered CMSF from Battlefront, but one thing I'm curious about is the situation re ammo in the new game. I've done a few searches, but none have come up with a definative answer as to how it will be represented. Will we have a similar systen to the previous CM games? Have to say that the way ammo was handled in the WW2 CM games was one of the few faults I found with that system. Even in my limited military experience with the British army, we had very tight fire discipline and were expected to make a basic loudout of 6 mags of 30 rounds each and 180 loose rounds last a very long time. In the original CM games ammo seemed to be expended far too quickly. Will every soldier have a set number of rounds, or will the whole squad of have a number of 'fire units' a la the original CM games? Awaiting the answer with baited breath! Won't have any effect on my decision to pre-order CMSF, cos it's going to wipe the floor with the competition anyway