cabal23

I just read some really impressive reviews of a new war movie about bomb disposal during the Iraq War called the Hurt Locker. It looks amazing. Check out the trailer. A definite must see for modern warfare enthusiasts and all around lovers of well done war movies.

Experience has shown me most of the time when a unit won't follow an AI order, there is an open AI command on another plan that doesn't match. Simply having the setup on another plan in a different location and no units to follow those orders will hose up you AI. When in doubt go through every setup and clear out all unused setup slots of info. Sometimes I put my red orders in Blue AI slots because often it all starts to bleed together after hours of doing this. It definitely can get confusing but 99% it comes down to user error.

Always looking for new opponents. I would love to teach you the PBEM ropes. PM me or email me at joseph.glessner@comcast.net. Joe

Are machine gun units able to deploy inside buildings? Is it assumed they have their gun propped up on a window? Because the animation shows them on the ground not giving them LOS. Just curious.

Wow, great idea. I have been looking for inspiration anyways. I will do some research. I have a new scenario coming soon called Belly of the Whale based on Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan. The problem is to replicate the actual battle would require a more ...errhhmm...robust program. Once you get to a certain size with this editor it become a giant slow monster that no one can run. I scaled it down to just one mountain and two blocking forces. Also a great read when it comes to Afganistan is Not a Good Day to Die the story of Operation Anaconda.

I also recommend playing every scenario on the Repository. I have found many gems there that far outclass what BF has done. Being they used the same editor, it only makes sense that players would come along and really push the editor to the extreme. When I design scenario's I always try and give the Syrians an edge through environmental modifiers or a higher caliber of troops. Check out the Siege of Latakia V2. I think you will enjoy. There are a ton of great ones out there, you just have to take the time to download them and try them out. I have downloaded every scenario and fe have dissapointed me.

I suppose it all comes down to intentions of the designer. Sometimes someone want's to tell a good story vs. give you a spreadsheet on what you will be facing. There are countless tales all through history of one side not being prepared and trying to survive impossible odds. It makes it more interesting I suppose for some players. I think there are tips and tricks every designer should consider, but there is no one right way to make a scenario. I tend to replay scenarios I enjoy, even if I play it PBEM and the Syrians suck wind. Sometimes just scoring one lucky RPG shot makes a game even if I lose. It certainly puts things in perspective. Perhaps the answer to the OP's wall of text (no harm intended by that remark) is that someone should create a guide to designing scenarios. It would certainly work for all CM games. I always try to tell a good yarn and make a viable H2H game when I create scenario's. I use environment and conditional modifiers to give the Syrians and edge in most cases due to absurd lack of a winning army. I think what people want is a good battle that is even in most cases so that each general can showcase his/her ability. The Syrians really create a problem here unless you want to be facing off against Syrian Special forces in every encounter. So perhaps in the next version we will see a more balanced force that provides more challenge for the US, so that less "gimmicks" will be required to make a scenario a even fight.

Well spoken! Sorry you had to weigh in on this once again. Very few game companies have conversations with their customers and explain the why and why nots. This is why BF has my money for life as long as they keep making amazing games. Through all the heated debates BF always has a solid, understandable answer for everything. I don't know how the games can get any more amazing than they are. Keep on rockin in the free world BF.

I read Shooter earlier this year and it talks about the move from traditional sniper roles to the new mobile sniper units that can move around a battlefield to support larger operations more effectively. Interestingly enough Sgt. Coughlin was often right ther not a block or two from the platoon. From what the books says, that was never the intention of snipers, but brass saw the results in Staff Sergeant Jack Coughlin's mobile strategies and now there is a move to change the way snipers operate. Sgt Coughlin was ridiculously successful and to explain it here would be silly. Read the book for more details. I think this new way to field snipers is quite pertinent to a fictional conflict like Syria. The question I raise is if anyone uses their snipers like this. For example hiding a jeep close to the sniper and then quickly moving him(the team) around the battlefield as the heat is turned up on the shooter.

I created Trial By Fire and I wanted to see what a small group of snipers and ATGM hummers could do. I had just finished reading Shooter and was intrigued by the authors radical departure from standard sniper tactics, using Humvess to quickly move soldiers around the field. Also the "Thunder Runs" of Gen Kill also intrigued me. I think armored Humvees provide a huge tactical advantage in the form of mobility. Unfortunately I agree with the assessment that they button up way too fast. An example is when I had a soldier aiming a TOW a building where he knows the fire is coming from. It is like trying to get a virgin on prom night to take her pants off. In out in out..it was almost a comedy. I think a soldier would take the risk if he knew where the fire was coming from and he had superior fire power to eliminate the enemy. I am not sure what the answer is but I know from reading many real life accounts that Humvees have much more versatility in the real world, especially when properly armored. I would hope by the time the fictional Syrian conflicts starts, we would not be faced with the quagmire that was unarmored Hummers rolling into combat, getting shot to pieces, as in the Iraq war.

I have brought this up multiple times in the past and BF just doesn't want to go there. Imagine being able to mod any army in the world. That would make this game huge. BF disagrees and that is fine because I love the product. But this game would be hugely marketable if they made it inclusive of all armies around the world. Something the mod community would gladly do if given the opportunity. The potential for creating conflicts all around the world is so viable, but I think they are very protective of the code and integrity of the programming itself. maybe BF would weigh in on this. As for conversion to space games like WH40k, I have a feeling the mathematical computation the computer uses to figure hits wouldn't match up to the current programming. Keep the conflicts here on earth and you have infinite possibilities. Other games would do that better..I don't know maybe Dawn of War, the game that was already made to simulate 40k.

Let me fire a Javelin while you stand on a roof and let see if you get up. Realistic? I think the concussion alone would at least knock someone out. No way would they be getting up after three successful Javelin hits. But then again I have never taken part in that particular experiment.

My only argument with the extreme setting is I feel it should be reserved for radical/fundamentalist crazies. Elite yes for the SOF, extreme motivation though? High I am sure, but I think a crazy insurgent would have a higher motivation due to his radical beliefs that he lives and dies by over the softer elite soldier. This is totally up for debate and these are just my thoughts.

No offense to anyone but that site is terrible. I will stick with the repository. The organization is terrible.

It's been done by me. It's called USMC vs ARMY No Fighting in The War Room I will be doing a V2 to clear up some issues. There were complaints of too many tanks, so I will scale them down a bit so it appears less like "command and conquer". It is challenging because Army and Marines have such high tech equipment. Check it out.

I a few weeks I will have a scenario using the airport map. All I need do is playtest. It is too beautiful to not use it in a scenario.

I just played it with a Defeat and I loved it. Also my only complaint is the 1 hour time limit. I too took most of my casualties from the one remaining tank I didn't get. Had only a few casualties up to that point, put we were raked over the coals after that. Beautiful scenario with a challenging premise. Four stars in my book. I would have given the 1 1/2 to 2 hrs as well. That isn't a long time by any means for a scenario of this size. it would allow for a bit more caution and less "hoping" there aren't enemies in the building you are rushing. I had all my forces on the outskirts of the farm at the 15 min mark and knew no way was I going to take the farm and the last point in that time frame safely. So I took my defeat and left. Keep up the hard work. A real keeper!

Vista is the equivalent of Windows Millenium. Wait for 7.

Not complaining but there are 409 post with Normandy in them. That was only a suggestion.

Could you create a Normandy Forum for all the Normandy questions in The Shock Force Forums? It's getting crazy now. I don't even look anymore because it's all Normandy posts. Any thoughts?

Considering the whole idea behind uncon fighting strategy is shoot and scoot it makes the Uncon AI a bit too stupid for its own good. Not enough options for an already too easy to decimate army. Uncons should be able to stay in a position for X amount of time and then retreat to another location. It is clear from BF though that they are NOT interested in changing the scenario editor, AI scripting, or the general uselessness of uncons. My advice is jack up their experience and hope they can hold out.

I would settle for an ETA on British.

I appreciate the feedback. It is a tremendous scenario with H2H in mind. I agree with all of your assessments of the single player portion. I do most of my gaming H2H and I find that when two good players play that scenario, it turns out not as one sided. As for Single player, there are javelins in the vehicles, not many but few. What I found in play testing was that Blue ended up decimated if the red player targets the blue tanks as they crest the hill they start on in setup. This can only be accomplished from the hill and the towers. Between the tanks on the hill and the javelins, it was a mess. Then Red had all the tanks and wasted the infantry column. We tried a lot of different ways to balance the beginning of the battle so that a nice tank battle would ensue. It is supposed to go in phases. Honestly there wouldn't be a tank fight in real life if red had enough javelins. That is why we toned them down to almost none so a real player couldn't use a thunder of javelins to wipe all the tanks out with. It was tough to balance a very challenging single player game with a balanced H2H battle. Thanks for the ideas, if I decide to do a V2, I will include those changes.

Having spent most of my life in the Navy we never called them snipers. They were just SEALS. They are not defined by their weapons like the other branches. The whole conversation was funny beacuse you can tell Greg Kilborne has no idea what he was talking about. Us squids thought it was funny also because how often do you hear about Navy and the words sniper in the same sentence, I mean how can you not crack a smile at that. We all agreed though it was about time the Navy got some positive attention for once. It is rare you ever hear about SEALS in a realistic light.

Yes to my knowledge there are only two blue on blue scenario's. One is Lone Star Shopping center, and one I did called Army vs. USMC No fighting in the war room. Check them both out.