Kieme(ITA)

I don't condemn ideas but the more or less offensive remarks and expressions towards people or groups of people. I am not in the position to tell BFC what is the best for the game, because I have not enough knowledge in programming nor gaming commercialization but I am capable of recognizing real suggestions from baseless talks not to mention diversion from the original poster in threads, that's why I am not going to pursue this here anymore.

Not sure it was in Normandy. Which unit was equipped with those 120 tanks?

So you compare the PR activity of a non-profit organization with that of a profit-driven company. Disregarding all kinds of differences, all kinds of copyright issues, platform and organization rules of all kinds. Even, I, with no knowledge of the game industry find this funny at least. I'd suggest you to become a professional game developer, then you might share something useful as battlefronts, in my opinion, when it comes to deeply detailed commercialization and development methods, until then yours is just an opinion from a customer. And any other comment on the "decency" of this community could be really avoided in the future, as it's not a good start for any conversation (a bad generalization that tends to cover all members following this Group/forum since a while). If you mean another thing ("decent" and "diverse" are different words, not synonyms, and I am not an english native Language speaker) next time think twice. Anyway, this is just the nth thread which some people want to turn into a steam debate (advertisement), and I find this boring.

That was an idea. I discussed it with BTR too. It's not a common thing in RU army, although it has been seen extensively in volunteer units of both sides of the actual ukr battlefield. I would like to add something like I did for the US Army vehicles, but I got two obstacles right now: a few doubds about the visual and immersion effects of these slogans (on official RU army vehicles as we have in game) and the Language barrier (I don't know russian).

I belive this community already is decent. It could be larger, but the quality is not under discussion.

It's an abstraction, the hull down system is not tailored for each and every vehicle in game, it's more generic. Facts: -The krizantema CAN GO hulldown (proven) -The krizantema CAN SHOOT from hulldown (proven) -the krizantema CAN USE RADAR (proven - M1 in my tests were behind their smoke cover, enough to block Thermal, not radar) I called that emplacement a "berm", but it's just the proof the kriza can go hull down in game. It was the game to tell me it was hull down, if it wasn't it would be called "partial hull down" instead. Your idea of perfect hull down kriza is just not the same as the game (or developers) visually, but in terms of effectiveness it's the same, If you desire try to make more kind of Hills... But calling bugs or vehicle broken seems inappropriate in this case.

If we had more dedicated files for each vehicle we could tailor down a lot of other sounds. For example: I managed to make a real T-64 engine sound that I use, but it's shared with bradleys, T-72s and a lot of other vehicles.

Not possible. Try to use spotters with higher training level.

I just did a test using a kriza from a full hull down positon. Take the editor, make a 2 points different berm, place the kriza slightly over the first slope and you got yourself a hull down. My kriza managed to spot and target an M1 hiding behind his smoke cover. Here, take a look: You will need 250m to get a line of sight, or, if you need a shorter one, make the tank climb the ramp a bit.

Another similar tactic is to let the M1 pop their smoke and keep behind it for those two minutes, more than enough time for a kriza to get out of cover (1 minute) and fire a salvo (1 minute). Or, if the kriza is already in position, it can fire 2 salvos in 2 minutes.

I have a list thick as a book of things I'd wish for CM series and this feature is no where to be found, even in the last pages.

Tried at 1000m: -the T-90AM ERA works very well, it completely stops an M1 AP round if it can catch it. Exposed armor sections will get penetrated all the time, causing a destroyed vehicle all the time. -the T-90AM is faster at acquiring/aiming/shooting the target than it was at 2000m. -the M1 is still fast enough at deploying its smoke to avoid getting shot at first (while the T-90AM is still not Always fast enough) -the T-90AM AP rounds score partial penetrations at M1 front (lower hull), which either deal armor spalling (no effect on crew or crew +1 suppression), no damage (no effect on crew or +1 suppression), a sub-system damage (lsr warning happened), or even a total kill (happened once in 4 tests). Yes, 2000m engagement and 1000m engagement are very different. The M1 has much better precision and is faster at shooting first at long range. At medium range (1000m could be called short, even) it's very different. ERA is reliable as previously, while the M1 armor becomes much more fragile to T-90 AP.

It's more of a ww2 thing.

Abstraction in abstraction, not just the crew hatches, there are other vital parts of the tank that can be accessed by a trained military assaulter. So I belive CM abstracts the Whole concept of "infantry hand-to-hand combat vs a tank in a modern warfare setting".

Nah, in the test I had the BTR-82 with open field in front, seems that the two clusers it has can deploy separately, each cluser has 3 or 4 nades that disperse a bit on the right (for the right launcher) and a bit on the left for the other, the very front is open (gets covered if the wind is blowing in the tangent direction).

The pop smoke feature uses pre-set smoke grenades, which are detonated from fixed tubes which have fixed elevations and power charges. This means that in game, just like in real life, the smoke grenades get deployed in clusters at a more or less precise position and distance from the vehicle. Therefore it's not something you can control. The russians are known to prefer a longer range deployment. intended for aggressive manouvering like shooting a smoke round from a gun tube. Infantry squads pop smoke as a smoke grenade in front of them at 20m. Now, the BTR-82 has a quite strange deployment radious, where the very front of the vehicle is not covered, this might be a bug.

To learn the game you need to play it over and over. You just need experience. Even experienced players will face different situations and make mistakes. There's no just "beating" the game until you kill the last boss of the last level and "game over". This game is meant to represent a tactical situation where you can give a certain degree of input, the fun stands on the long Learning curve (which is practically infinite).

Ok, I did some testing, got some interesting responses. -Suppose you place a single building inside a single game tile. -Suppose that you paint "terrain objective - destroy" on that very single tile, and give it 1000 points. -Take a tank or a Bradley, make them raze the building (tearing it down completely until it collapses). -Result: you get 1000 points for complete objective achievement. -Suppose you place a single building inside a single game tile. -Suppose that you paint "terrain objective - destroy" on that tile and the 8 Tiles around it, and those Tiles only have grass on them, and give it 1000 points. -Take a tank or a Bradley, make them raze the building (tearing it down completely until it collapses). -Result: you get 500 points for partial objective achievement. -Suppose you place a single building inside a single game tile. -Suppose that you paint "terrain objective - destroy" on that very single tile, and give it 1000 points. -Take a tank or a Bradley, make them just damage the building (destroy a wall). -Result: you get no points. Now, repeating the two above with an engineer squad, using all its demo charges (breach kits) on the building, and without tearing down the building (because evidently their equipment isn't powerful enough), you won't get any point. Seems to me you really need to raze the building to get the points, but be careful of where you paint your terrain objective - destroy. Either the manual is not correct (the word "damage" should be removed), or the game doesn't recognize "damaged" as a sufficient condition to award the points.

I belive the problem is that infantry seems not capable of blowing up an entire building alone. I'll take a look at it. A possible solution might be to change building. I tried, and indeed infantry can't destroy a building, therefore the DESTROY command seems more suited for heavies weapons. In CMBS infantry carries brach kits more than demo charges, so it makes sense they can't completely blow up a building.

Problem is, you will never find the same situation in any of your QBs. There will Always be something different, a tree patch, an elevation, an obstacle, a different angle, conditions etc.. Too many variables to judge from a laboratory point of view that is the test scenario.

Yes I agree, the comparison many people do is due to the thinking of top-tier MBT of the game, and people are used to consider the top tiers in a given game as equal. CMBS is not the case. Someone might wish to think this for nationalistic pride or stuff like that, Others for some sort of "balance" sake. The truth is, what Panzer said. These kind of "tests" are useful mainly to find some bugs (for example: a tank never using its smoke granades), but not much else. Although i discovered some differences of the two tanks thanks to this direct XvsX test.

I completely killed the building by shooting at it with a tank.

I noticed that on many occasions the T-90AM ERA is quite capable of stopping M1's AP rounds. The ERA absorbs the AP (the block disappears), and behind it a ricochet/scratched metal decal appears. I had a situation where the M1 fired a shot at each T-90AM within the same turn, resulting in both ERA hit results. Moreover, the ERA hit result didn't cause any significal sub-system damage to the T-90s.

Kieme CMBS BTR-80-82 Special thanks to BTR for providing the ideal green base textures This mod covers the BTR-80a, 80ak, 82, 82a and 82k variants. IMPORTANT: this mod comes in 3-tone camo and dark green versions, please make sure you choose only one to use. 3-tone camo download: https://app.box.com/s/epo5cea3s33l42p55vzr04lm5cov1o2l 3-tone camo preview: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Plain dark green download: https://app.box.com/s/2gm061govy27eoxgp9cftxgmpclvr31y Plain dark green preview:

It is possible that the manual is wrong or something is wrong in game. Anyway, I just tested that completely destroying a building gives objective (destroy) complete.