reel-why

I find that my forces are massive in QB too. I'm currently looking into extremely small scale fine detail scenarios. Smaller Units? [ October 06, 2007, 10:39 PM: Message edited by: reel-why ]

its impossible to play any multiplayer? well not hotseat but I havent tried anything other than that.

Is there any way to change the number of men in a squad or the weapons they are carrying? I've been looking carefully through the editor, what can be purchased and deleted and renamed and so on. I can't seem to see if or where this would be possible. It doesn't seem like that complex a tool, but it could be all the platoons are pre-built. I'm envisioning very small scale infantry specific maps that would see you micro commanding. At this point I'm using 2 person command groups, radio teams, and forward observers. But I'd like to be able to have units carrying more than just M4s. Any advice? perhaps there's an external area where the link between the men and the squad title can be modified? Thanks for any help

I'm trying to lure a friend of mine into CMSF but the 1.02 demo runs like crap on his computer. I think a 1.04 demo would actually go along way towards getting him to purchase a copy. Glad to hear this (might) happen

I had no idea this was possible. I sort of thought in the modern warfare getting that close to a tank is usually impossible. Pretty cool that its in there. Can syrian forces do it too?

Talk about alot being packed into a patch! Thanks a boatload BF. I'd especially like to highlight the "pause message is now smaller and less obtrusive." Of all the crazy things the fans asked for I am amazed that this tiny detail made it in. Talk about listening ever so intently. In my personal opinion that level of implementation more than makes up for early issues with CMSF.

I think you have to wait for the 1.04 patch and the expected ability to place pauses at waypoints. that should allow for a shoot and scoot

are there any recorded HALO insertions? On some level I kinda thought that just showed up in action movies and videogames. It seems ya know...almost too cool for reality.

Sounds like a full area Target Arc to me. After the computer has held down an imaginary "shift" and told their unit to watch everything

The fire and the helicopters sound awsome to me...oh wait there it is. Grappeling hooks and zip lines! We've already got the technology to walk across air. Just turn it from "bug" to "feature"

I dont think any vehicle crews can swap. I've been meaning to make a post about that for a while now. Try it with your bradley or any vehicle. If the gunners dead a new gunner cant get in. and if you bail out i think only the original team can get back in. its those damned remote locks on the doors

Their in a few of the scenarios too. Gawd I cant recall which one...bunch of uncons spread across a large field? not very helpful I guess. One of the "one size up from smallest" battles.

This happens for me too and I'm running an ATI X800. Maybe its an ingame setting? sometimes I just turn shadowing off cause its too annoying. It probably comes from the presence of that "rocket skirt"

I was trying to press CM on a friend of mine who only plays RTS games. During the convo he asked if there were any motorcycles in CMSF which got me thinking. What vehicles or troops or equipment would you hate to see in a CM game? Something that might seem cool for about 1/4 of a second and then made you feel dirty and moronic. The motorcycle is a perfect example. Somebody might go "oh ya that'd be fun" but just stop and think for a moment. What the hell would be the point? The other one that came to mind: infantry carrying a M134 mini-gun. There's a hollywood moment of *sweet* then logic kicks back in. I'm interested to know what other people can imagine but would loathe.

I seems to me that Uncon could really benefit from having something just a tiny bit heavier. Even if it was just a covered technical. Does anyone know where the name comes from? Because lets face it...their not technical at all.

Thats really interesting about the weight difference, and upon consideration I realize there really is alot of weight that isn't explosive in something like a missile. I agree on the easy structure collapse, it seems fine with one and two story buildings, but watching an 8 story monstrosity go down after a few rounds seems strange. 1600 is actually far more than I had expected. They seem like very specialized situation weapons. Where did that stat come from? And are there more interesting snippets of data where it came from?

ooo! I haven't tried a javelin against entrenched enemies yet. Their alot of fun as a weapon, but I think its an excellent choice that they're optional. If every squad started with one it could have been a real issue for those more realism concerned or wanting to have any sort of fast moving assault squad. Do javelins slow troops down? I remeber seeing a post about that somewhere but I can't recall the answer.

I always thought that the Javelin was an anti-tank weapon first and formeost, I'll have to look around for that video. They seem to do an amazing amount of damage to buildings, but although 3 rounds (missiles? charges? whats the word for a javelin munition?) seems like alot they chew through them pretty fast.

I wonder if this is a result of the new modern combat "huge range" thing. People aren't used to various weapons being deadly at such a distance. As a result they may not be thinking in terms of lethality when creating maps and establishing deployment zones.

cool thanks. not gonna lie, I haven't noticed any improvements, but then again I wasn't having any trouble.

good thinking! New QB maps it is!

I played one iteration of the close combats a while ago. I dunno how much is transferrable, as close combat (was) a strictly turn based. I think TacAI is where most people are concerned for CMSF. I've never actually had AI do a crawl of death (lucky me!)

So do the new QB maps overwrite the ones included in CMSF or are they additional maps? I was sort of hesitant to dl them because from the wording on the site it seems like they're a replacement. Of course now that I have some people telling me their a worthwhile replacement I might just dl them anyway, but the idea of overwriting and losing other maps makes me edgy.

So I've found myself frequently making use of what may or maynot be a legitimate tactic. When confronted with opposition in dense urban areas rather than follow the Capt'n's (man thats weird gramatically) excellent advice on slow go and cover I find myself picking up as many Javelins as possible and splitting off the troops carrying them. Regular infantry go into the buildings spot the troops then I area fire with the javelins to reduce the buildings to rubble. Its worked so far, but I feel a bit underhanded doing so. Do you think Javelins are ever used this way? Targeting dug in infantry and essentially filling the spot of off map artillery? It doesn't seem very plausible to me.

exactly! its hard to time that prntscn push while everythings happening