bodkin
-
Posts
784 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by bodkin
-
-
I hope it's only because they're beta version shots, but alot of the troop and vehicle textures look to be of average quality.
-
Apart from a few sequences that seem new most of this is colourised footage that I've seen seen before in b&w. Unless some forgotten reels are found somewhere I doubt we'll ever see any new WW2 footage. Thanks for the link but Bowen42.
I found this site a while back and thought it was quite unique, the pic of the smoke rising from the battle below was an interesting new perspective and made me think about what the defenders of Bastogne must have been going through. Does anyone know what the different parachute colours signify?
http://www.506infantry.org/his2ndbnwwiiarticle08.html
I found a Dutch site a few years ago that had a sound recording on it of a british correspondant on the ground in the Arnhem area as the paratroops were decending, he was describing the air drop and you could hear the German flak guns in the background. Unfortunately i've never been able to locate that amazing bit of audio again.
-
I can't see the difference in the legend between a machine gun and antitank gun, I presuming the dashed arrows are the mg's?
-
I remember Steve saying that the first game will feature a US and a German campaign. However what style of campaign is unknown, I'd guess it would be like the CMSF:BF one where you come to a point in the campaign where you can choose different paths to take.
-
I'd like to see some refinement of targeting when knocked out vehicles are in the line of fire. I just watched a squad firing at target 100m away but because there was a KO'd vehicle in the line of fire about 20m away they wasted most of their precious ammo firing into the dead hull.
-
Has anyone had a win on this scenario since 1.21 and this change:
'Soldiers tire more quickly moving across difficult terrain or in very hot weather'
Just interested if anyone has had any success, I thought it was diabolically hard before the patch.
Paper Tiger, have mercy on my gaming soul.
-
*Spoilers below*
Playing in WEGO I started this scenario and rushed for the wooded terrain shown on the tactical map as the place to setup a defensive position. However this resulted in a distressing slaughter of men and vehicles who were rained on by rpg's from every direction.
I've started again but this time I'm just holding pretty much the original starting position and using the trenches along the road. My vehicles are still fairly exposed but I've managed to retain three of my LAV's for the time being.
Looks like the main red assault's just starting things are getting intense now, nice looking map btw.
-
Bigduke6, missed another one the naive Lieutenant straight out of West Point that does things buy the book and 'is gonna get alot of men killed'. Although during the course of the movie he learns to break the rules from the veteran sergeant that saves his life and eventually becomes accepted by the platoon. Usually dosen't get killed.
-
I had exactly the same issue with this mission, I got all but three of the convoy trucks to the end zone yet suffered a defeat because I hadn't cleared the nearby village. I found this annoying as the mission briefing never said anything about clearing villages and stressed the point of getting your trucks to the objective at all costs.
Other members of this forum thought I should accept it :
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1149596#post1149596
Yet if every mission was designed like this with unknown objectives the game becomes too obscure and vague in my opinion.
-
I was playing some Empire total war today and really think that CMx2 could benefit from a similar system having forests and trees stay visible in a very low quality form at long range. Not so much to do with visual pretty (which it does add too) but mainly the tactical gain it adds of being able to tell where the trees are without running around the map (having maneuvers fail because there was a forest in the way that didn't render).
I was wondering about this myself, I play ETW and have smooth graphical representation of forests on large maps. I understand BFC hasn't the resources of Sega but maybe a low res depiction of distant objects is something they could think of implementing in the future.
-
Steve,
Can you say if the SOP of the 29th ID in Normandy will be possible in CM:N? And if not will this doom any tank breaking through the hedgerow to the waiting panzerfausts?
Note point 7:
http://www.2ndbn5thmar.com/tank/tirefs/BustingtheBocage.pdf
As I said earlier it seems almost essential using these tactics that tanks should have some sort of area fire command similar to the cover arc command but which dosen't rely on a target being spotted first, instead the tank would rake the given arc with heavy or light fire. Is there any chance this sort of command could be added?
Also the use of 60mm mortars in close range combat maybe shouldn't rely on TRP's. If they are implemented like in CMx1 then they are probably restricted in use and require the player to place them before the scenario starts which means they could be completely useless if they haven't picked where the enemy is. Yet from that link it sounds like the mortar teams would have been pretty close to the action and would have a reasonably good idea where they wanted to target even if they had no direct line of sight.
I obviously have no insight into how breaching hedgerow tactics work in CM:N, and in terms of gameplay my questions may be irrelevant.
Thanks.
-
Michael,
Doubler's "Busting the Bocage" - the pre-cursor to "Closing with the Enemy" - is available in full, online, at the US CGSC or CARL site. That is where you're most likely to find anything meaningful, I should think.
Hopefully CM:Normandy will introduce some new features that will help us use the tactics described in that document. With the present set of commands a tank would go through the hedgerow but there is no command to lay down a supressive arc of raking fire to pin any defenders in the far hedgerow leaving the tank vulnerable until it spots a target. Also we need mortars to be able to fire over hedgerows without line of sight to the target point.
-
Currently we have about 30 testers. Some have been with us for 4 years, some only for a few months, and the majority somewhere inbetween. As we get closer to completion we'll take on some more testers, few of them CM:SF players. We are quite interested in what non-CM:SF players have to say about CM: Normandy in its close to release state.
Steve
I think you should include some basic learning scenarios again with the release of CM:Normandy like you did with CMBO. In my opinion the general difficulty level of base game scenarios has increased with each of the new CM:SF modules, which is ok for veteran players but you'll probably get a lot of new players with CM:N that may be put off if they find it too frustrating to start with.
Just a thought.
-
- the Marines gives the reds the T90, almost as good as best blue MBTs, as well as the BMP3 which is both dangerously armed and vulnerable to going up in a blaze of exploding fragments.
A bit OT but scenario designers seem to have ignored both of these units since the Marines release, I think there are only one or two user made scenarios out there that use either. Which is odd as many people remark on the overwhelming firepower advantage that blue has.
-
Interesting that it's only replacing the woodland DPM. It sounds like it wouldn't be as suitable for temperate climates and is the result of neither the desert or woodland being suitable for Helmand. I can see someone in the DoD saying "well you can't have three sets of camouflage that's just being silly".
-
I think, and hope that with a return to ww2, CMx2 will engender the same spirit and size of community that CM-1 has.
I agree but when CMSF first came out BFC had to spend a lot of time convincing the CMx1 veterans of why the CMx2 engine was better and how the way forward was better with modules etc.
I feel a little sorry for BFC that they are going to have to go over the same ground again as CMx1 veterans that didn't buy CMSF will bring up some of the old issues of the differences between the two engines and the difference in scope of CMx2 titles compared to CMx1.
Maybe they should setup a sticky FAQ thread about such issues with links to relevant threads.
-
We don't, this is a much discussed topic with the consensus of previous threads being that it would be nice to know what the aircraft payload was.
-
Welcome to the forum.
I don't know about question 1, but I'm pretty sure question 2 is not simulated in CMSF.
I base my answer on nothing other than game time experience. Why would being unbuttoned improve survivability? Is it a physics thing? Yet even then the more available area for the explosive force to escape through would probably doom an occupant who sits near one the hatches. Just my thoughts.
-
I vaguely recall BFC saying that the Aussie SAS would be included at some stage. It was a response to a request that they be included based on the fact they were one of the first units into Iraq in 2003. It was before CMSF was released and I can't find the thread so I'm probably deluded.
In any case to say they are the best modern troops around is questionable. There is no answer to who has the best SF, at least when you consider the professional elite services of the more advanced militaries. Unless your going to put them all in the same combat role and see how they perform or put them against each other in some sort of death game knock out competition you're always going to get a nationalistic or biased response, with objectivity lost in the mix.
Hmmm I think I've just got an idea for a new reality TV show - Survivor - Special Forces.
-
-
One thing to remember is that CMx2 models a squad as a cohesive unit that is usually more bunched together than what they would be in reality. Steve has mentioned this before in reference as to why artillery effectiveness against infantry can appear to be weaker than one would expect. Artillery is slightly diluted as the squad is abstracted to some extent in terms of their spacing, perhaps MG fire is possibly modelled to account for this abstraction as well, yet it's not been mentioned before as far as my dim memory recalls.
-
Except of course it was first fielded in the mid 70's.
So if 30+ years old = "new" to you, then I guess its "new".
You should have added the smiley to the second part of your post, otherwise someone might mistake you as a miserable bastard.
-
"Department of Transportation???"
Don't know about Melbourne but the transport 'cops' in Sydney are like the SS reborn.
-
Maybe their just working hard to get the game finished before taking a break. If they post a screenshot of german infantry Steve will have to spend the next two weeks explaining why the style of chin strap on the German helmet or the shape of an officers belt buckle is correct for the Normandy theatre.
Airsupport - how is it represented?
in Combat Mission Afghanistan
Posted
In CMx1 games any ground units with AA capabilities would fire up at attacking aircraft, this feature is not included in CM:SF, probably because there are no dedicated AA units. It would be nice to see this again in CM:A or CM:N. Stinger armed mujahideen?