Bulgaroktonos
-
Posts
52 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bulgaroktonos
-
-
For all of yous that wanted to keep going after a loss, that alternate version is up in the repos. It's Rolling Lords of War Alt 1.
-
There is a new version, and it's up.
-
CAS does not show up immediately. Rather there is a short (5 min) delay to simulate the relaying of information to the FAC, allowing time for the air support to be assigned to the platoon.
-
You've got some interesting ideas, but as for this,
* When doing area targeting vs. a building, having an option to select a specific floor or the entire building would be nice.
You can already do this, just click on the floor in question. This includes rooftops.
-
Alternate names for this campaign include "Beep beep I'm not a jeep", WIDE LOAD and Kings of the Road.
The mission maps are all based on real-world locations, and were made with the rather extensive help of Google Earth.
edit: Forgot to mention that we also had a little help from JonS and Steve, who helped us choose the rough geographic area of the campaign.
Enjoy!
-
Given the slim premise of CM:SF I would totally be up for a Bear and the Dragon or Dragon and Elephant game. Of course, Korean War, Vietnam War, and Balkan games would be nice. Maybe a game about the In/Pak conflicts of 71.
-
There they are!!! Thank you very kindly.
-
I'm having a strange issue with scenarios that I write not being visible in the explorer. I'm using 64 bit Windows Vista, which may be the source of the problem.
I can see the scenarios in the scenario editor and in the battle list, which makes this all the more perplexing. I can also see scenarios sent to me by friends etc. It is all very bizarre.
-
In the fine tradition of being offered an inch and taking a mile, when are we going to see a CM:SF 2 bone?
Come on, Battlefront. Don't make me whine! You'll regret it!
Back on topic, I've never really had much of an interest in German kit, hopefully this module will change that. On the off chance that it doesn't, of course, I can always hope that someone mods in the Spanish.
-
Now I really don't expect a ZSU type unit with the NATO module as if it were added people would want it to shoot at blue aircraft and I really don't think they want to spend the time putting an anti air element into CMSF. Elmar wants it just to shoot at ground targets but I think he'd be an exception. As he put it "people and their expectations are keeping us from getting things into the game!"
To be honest I'd be happy to see a 'burning wreckage' artillery model (AAA included) just to add a bit of atmosphere
-
GSX,
No matter how unlikely someone might feel it may be, the fact is NATO could decide to invade Syria. Our backstory adequately explains why this decision would come about. On the other hand, Syria can't make huge amounts of military hardware, which it has no money to pay for, arrive overnight via FedEx
There's no backstory that can credibly change that.What if they won the lottery?
-
According to Jane's the Syrian Army has 'sought to enhance its armoured forces by acquiring the T-80 from The Russian Federation, but there is no confirmation of an actual delivery.'
The wikipedia article seems to be based on wishful thinking.
-
Although I think there's more RT players out there than most think. Not just referring to the huge typical RTS crowd either. I like many others initially preferred TB playing with CMSF due to CMx1 days. But can now say I enjoy RT over it. Although I'm still down for PBEM of course.
RT affords great control and ability. As soon as my forces get attacked/ambushed I can immediatly pause and deal with it. Compared to TB sometimes your stuck watching a squad get wasted. Not the case in RT, bad moves can easily be salvaged.
I vastly prefer real time to turn based, not only because of the amount of control it gives but also because of the immersion value and the fact that I do a lot of my planning 'on the fly'.
-
Steve, what's your take on Victor Davis Hanson's Why the West Has Won? (this is the British title; the original was something like Carnage and Culture)? Your posting reminded me of Hanson's conclusions.
I'm not Steve (thankfully!
) but I can tell you that while Hanson is an admirable classicist, when he goes beyond that era he is way off the mark, especially with his ideas that the 'Western Way of War' is somehow more deadly than the 'Eastern Way', and has some kind of immutable attributes that are continuously visible throughout history (or maybe just some very cherry-picked examples).And Steve,
That is not to say repressive systems can't get good results from individuals, because they can, it's just that their pool is so much smaller and there are almost always artificial limitations placed on creativity.
While I agree a degree of individual freedom is important, it is worth noting that some of the forces most repressive against the individual, like the German army in WWI and Alexander the Great's Macedonians, have very good track records. Admittedly, neither of these are 100% against the individual, but I don't think you can find a historical example that was.
-
Every map out of the fifty or so (campaign and standalone) was like that? You tried them all?
So who was it who got steamrollered in "UK The Mouse Trap", and who was at a disadvantage in "UK the 2nd Eleven"? Was it really that lop-sided in "UK Outmanoeuvred" and "UK Out of the Wilderness"? Did anyone else who played those four scenarios specifically find them to be unbearably easy cakewalks?
UK Out of Wilderness is pretty easy to win as Red. It's a whole lot of perverse fun to see T-72s chew up some Challengers.
-
The M14, even in its shortened variant, is not good for room clearing. Aside from concerns of over-penetration with a full sized rifle round, you also have to deal with the recoil, and though the weight of the rifle compensates some, you still end up with a much heavier rifle (10.5 lbs according to the Springfield site!), and a smaller magazine capacity to boot. Also, the idea that 5.56 is designed for wounding the enemy so that his buddies will be distracted helping him is flat out wrong. Damage that will stop an enemy is permanent damage to important organs, specifically the spinal column, heart, and brain. Because the M193 round fragments, it not only induces more internal bleeding, it also creates a larger wound channel and is more likely to hit those important organs.
While 7.62x51 is heavier and faster, that is only helpful for long-range shooting or penetrating cover which is why the round is used in the SR-25 and M40.
The Soviets didn't change to 5.45 because they thought the number was lucky.
The M14 is a beautiful weapon, but in practical terms it is little more than an adaptation of the Garand, as jenrick pointed out. Besides, real 7.62x51 lovers go for the FAL or G3.
-
Consider the alternative: Apache (for whatever reason) does not engage and kill insurgent. Insurgent successfully plants IED. Humvee convoy drives down road, triggers IED -- two dead, three wounded. Remaining soldiers -- driven to rage by yet more killing of their comrades by what they consider cowardly and undefenable means -- dismount, storm through several nearby houses and kill everyone (none of whom are insurgents) they encounter.
Hahaha what? What bizarro world do you live in where US soldiers commit war crimes every time someone gets killed by an IED?
-
Got the notice Friday. Arrived this morning.
Mighty quick by USPS standards (even Priority Mail standards).
Same here.
-
Hey MARS42, sorry to treat you like an encyclopedia, but what do you think of the G36? I've heard some complaints about the optics on the dual sight, but since the closest thing we can get over here is the rather pitiful SL8 I haven't had a chance to check it out myself.
-
I think this is more perception than anything. The Marines are definitely lacking the sorts of super heavy, hard hitting AT weapons found in HBCT and, to some extent, SBCT... however, they definitely have quite a lot of low level AT capabilities.
HBCT Battalions have massive AT power in the form of Bradleys and Abrams. Between Bradleys and a Javelin for every Squad, the Mech Infantry Companies are inseparably loaded with massive AT capabilities. Abrams are almost always present too. Nobody else can come close to this amount of firepower.
SBCT Rifle Companies have Javelins for every squad with MGS as a backup AT weapon. In theory there is also a platoon of Stryker MGS available for each Battalion, but since those are Brigade level they aren't that likely to be seen.
The Marines, however, are only "rich" with AT weapons when viewed as a part of an MEU. The majority of the AT capabilities coming from Humvee mounted TOW-2 ATGM. When you get down to a single Marines Rifle Company, however, it only has a couple of Javelins as its primary AT capability. However, each Rifle Platoon is by default augmented with two SMAWs allocated from the Battalion's Weapons Company. While not nearly as effective as the Javelin, they are quite useful.
SMAWs are awesome anti-armor weapons. Here is a very enlightening diagram of what the SMAW can do (click to enlarge):
What this means is that the Marines have a pretty decent AT capability no matter what. But to get BIG hitters in action the scenario designer has to allocate Regimental assets or the Battalion's single CAAT Platoon (with 6x TOW-2s). Those things should be present in the average scenario only on rare occasions.So unless the scenario is mixing in higher level support units, the Marines are pretty light on AT capabilities beyond rifle range. The exception being the two Javelins, which according to General Murphy, will in the wrong place at the wrong time
Steve
Let's not forget Close Air Support, an intrinsic part of any Marine Expeditionary Force. At a company level, if the CO has access to a radio or one of the battalion's three Forward Air Controllers, he can bring a whole lot of hurt to his location awfully quickly, provided there are aircraft on-line and in the air to heed the call. A good example of this can be seen in Capt. Eddie S. Ray's defence of the 1st Marine Division Forward Command Post on 25 February 1991 in which he helped coordinate multiple Cobra strikes. Admittedly, Syria is a much larger operation than Kuwait, but the fact still stands that if there is a real need for the aircraft, the Direct Air Support Center can put any and all necessary air assets in the hands of a company commander with high priority, and/or his FAC, and keep eliminating targets until there are none left for the aircraft to deal with.
That's how it works doctrinally anyway...
And let's not forget that the Marine Corps will not intentionally pit one of its infantry or AAV companies against enemy Armor assets, so I wouldn't worry about them too much.
-
Sounds like World of Warcraft
All you need is maddening 6 hour long battles that must be completed with a bunch of inept randoms from the internet, and then a slight random chance to get an upgraded M1A2 TUSK, and you're sorted.
D&D actually.
I kick it old school, FMB can attest to this.Bullethead? Is that you?Nope. Don't know who that is.
-
I have a great idea for a reward system.
A player gets a number of points after each mission, and there are different levels of points. The basic point unit is the Cool Point (CP) and for each Total Victory at a scenario level, let's suppose that the player gets 5 CP. Well, the level of points above that is Smooth Points (SP), and it's 10 CP to 1 SP. If the player completes so many missions that they get 10 SP, that equals 1 Groovy Point (GP). GP, SP, and CP can be used to purchase items from the Battlefront website. For example, you could start selling KaBar knives for $50 OR 2 GP. I think I've encountered a reward system like this somewhere before, I just can't think of where....
-
This may be it.
It's not just rooftops, it appears as if maybe the default "cover" factor has been reduced. It may just be the additional numbers in U.S. squads help them fare better.
Personally I'm wondering how realistic this is, as I've always thought lethality of small arms in game was way overpowered anyway. From what I've seen of videos of Fallujah and reading books like "House to House", it can take a hell of a lot of small arms fire to even wound a guy without body armour. I recall one SAW gunner expended over 200 rounds to try and bring down an insurgent wearing captured U.S. body armour out in the open.
That seems like a bizarrely high number. What kind of distances did this take place at?
-
Set a 360 degree targeting arc (press shift for 360) that's as small as it needs to be to avoid firing on what you don't want firing on.
That is a good makeshift solution, I didn't know about holding shift. Thanks for that. Does it affect their powers of observation outside of that circle like it does with a regular arc? Because if so then it is still not a wholly satisfactory solution, and I'd still like to see an ability to distinguish between vehicle and infantry targets so I don't have to slap my javelin team for wasting an $80,000 missile on a vehicle crew member.
) but I can tell you that while Hanson is an admirable classicist, when he goes beyond that era he is way off the mark, especially with his ideas that the 'Western Way of War' is somehow more deadly than the 'Eastern Way', and has some kind of immutable attributes that are continuously visible throughout history (or maybe just some very cherry-picked examples).
CMSFII: Battle in the Balkans
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
The baltics and Poland are spazzing out over a Russia that has radically shrunk its military and shows little interest in expansion. NATO has drawn up a token plan to calm them down. This is not a new cold war.