Shadow Stalker

Welcome to BFC CMSF HQ Merry Christmas

I know one Up for a game of multiplayer eh, sounds good give me a pm

Hey I take exception from that at least were still in the fight.

Sorry Double post

Hi Welcome to the forum I'am not sure what others do but try small movements using your mouse as it helps to maintain control over the camera as for zooming functionality try using the middle mouse wheel it works for me. Cant answer about icons, as I always leave them on, as it helps in locating which units are under fire. As for modding try using Zee-bees mod manager in the CMSF repository (its second to none ) Regards Shadow Stalker

I personally am happy with this decison. Moon is right Steam is some sort of massive facebook fan club for gamers. I mean seriously their whole attitude of you cant play with your toys unless you use our sandbox smacks of discrimination on its purest form. I thought game publishers were all about helping people buy games not putting up one DRM hurdle after another to you the consumers (the one who pays their salaries). Sadly people see Steam as some sort of Messiah in gaming world and worse still try to emulate them (any one been to Big fish games lately). Battlefront (God Bless them) are one the few games companys/publishers around that still value there customer base, and I for one am thankfull for that.

Great News Good to see BFC expanding. Welcome Phillip

I agree both in game as Ryujin suggested and in the real world it has been seen time and again that suicide bombers on foot can get closer to the their targets then VBIED,s especially when female suicide bombers are involved. (As abhorrently distasteful as this is) http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE62T114.htm More over suicide bombers on foot have killed a number of high profile world leaders including: Pakistan's President; Benazir Bhutto, India’s President; Rajiv Ratna Gandh, and the President of Sri Lanka; Ranasinghe Premadasa. As stated by both Ryujin and Inkompetent In our realm the use of close quarters combat is ideal in the use of suicide bombers, although never used there are indications that even the insurgents in Fallujah were considering this tactic. “Marines in Fallujah recovered a variety of exploding vests and belts, some packed with a blend of explosives and lead fishing weights. Unit reporting does not indicate any suicide bombers were actually employed in combat, however” http://www.scribd.com/doc/9228158/Fallujah-httpwikileaksorgleakfallujahpdf

Thanks Mikey D for the explanation, however there is still the uncon side of CMSF that would use these tactics don't you agree?

The battle between the Israelis and some Palestinian organizations (such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad) is a classic case of asymmetric warfare. Israel has a powerful army, air force and navy, while these Palestinian organisations have no access to large-scale military equipment; instead, they utilize asymmetric tactics, such as: small gunfights in Palestine's West Bank, cross-border sniping, rocket attacks,[15] and suicide bombing.[16]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_warfare#Asymmetric_warfare_and_terrorism Ok so enough of the history lesson, my question to members of BFC and some of the old hands on the forum is this; As suicide bombing is an integral part of asymmetric warfare and CMSF is in part based on this concept, why where suicide bombers left out of CMSF and its modules? This puzzles me as just about every other aspect of asymmetric warfare is represented including VIED’s, this is even more strange when just about every insurgent organisation in the world has used or is using this tactic. Any thoughts? (Apologies if this topic has been brought up before).

Thanks for your comments they make interesting reading, I think some of you have misinterpreted my original post and have been a little hung up on my 2 examples. It wasn’t my intention whether these 2 examples do or do not fit into the CMSF universe; they were purely there as an example of how simple static military based flavour objects can bring about whole new mission designs and thus create more flexibility to scenario designers. I personally believe that these relatively simple changes (remember these are static objects so no animations will be needed) will ultimately benefit the entire community, as specific missions in Afghanistan or Iraq or some future theatre (Iran anyone) can be faithfully recreated. As Uncovergeek said even Modern Warfare or Bad Company types of missions could even be recreated. These simple military based flavour objects bring about new military design possibilities, “Instead of grab building a b c and d, destroy missile silo etc etc”. There have also been some great suggestions by some members of the community. I too am all for flavour objects that include; destroyed vehicles, artillery gun objects and even Forcemultipliers suggestion of dead bodies, infact anything at all that increases the realism, atmosphere, immersion and most importantly the longevity of this great game.

I know flavour objects of various kinds such as cows, haystacks and the like have been mention before and in my opinion these all have merit. The thing about flavour objects is that they produce realism, atmosphere and immersion in the game. In a game like CM this is a must. Don't get me wrong I think the devs and the community have done a fantastic job and I personally play CM at least a couple of times a week. I was however playing ArmA the other day and what makes that game so enjoyable is the immersion and realism achieved by the flavour objects. As CM is a military based game I thought having miltary flavour objects would enhance this immersion. I was thinking along the lines of not just barbed wire fences and bunkers but more game changing static based flavour objects. These could be observation posts, radar dishes, radio communication towers, ICBM missle silos and fixed and mobile SAM or SCUD missle platforms. These elements could be incorporated into more realistic Army and Airbases. These types of bases for example could have static period based tanks, armoured vehicles, aircraft, helicopters and support equipment (fuel and ammo trucks, bombs etc). These elements although static would in my opinion breath new life into the game that we all love. A couple of examples could be that CAS based support would not be be available until all SAM sites have been taken out. Another could be that bases containing ICBM silos would have to be taken in a specific time before the enemy has time to "launch" These are just two examples off the top of my head the talented community could provide other more realistic scenarios I'am sure given what I have seen so far. As I'am not a modeler I'am not sure how difficult this would be to implement but it certainly something to consider to enhance CM for the future. Hopefully I'am not alone on this.

To save the furore over last year, I was wondering if BFC could give the community a heads up, regarding physical packaging of the CM Nato and Normandy modules as well as the CM Afghanistan stand alone game. Ie. Whether these will be DVD or Jewel case based options. As there is no option for a poll I would like +1 for the DVD option. Personally I think the Marines module was a quality product, whereas many people including myself regard jewel cases as inferior in quality, capacity and protection compared to the hard plastic of a DVD case. I'am sure any bones thrown in the communitys direction will be most appreciated

Apoligies if this has already been covered. Seen as we are now receiving screenshots for CM Normandy and NATO which means these games are advancing. I as I'am sure many others are wondering what new AI enhancements (if any) will be included for the new games?

+ 1 for China

Well done BFC, Very nice work. Excellent bone, Love the camo. Instant Buy for me

I too am a world war 2 buff and have loads of WW2 games to testify to this fact however I also like the modern stuff and as evidence by the NATO thread alot of you guys like it as well. So as the Normandy bone is now out of the way and now been completely discussed, is there any chance for any info regarding the NATO module?

I guess I'll add my 2 cents Just read the thread, some great ideas here. In regards to the recent "one sided" debate perhaps thermobaric grenades or warheads could be introduced to the Syrian side to "balance" the perceived force discrepancies. I don't approve of promoting our enemies propaganda but these devices are rather effective for anti armour operations. (RIP to all our fallen coalition men and women) http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=133_1248034763 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d8a_1180675064 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RKG-3_anti-tank_grenade http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001969.html +1 to medics and female soldiers. Some other useful ideas Electronic communications jammers EMP based weapons (think IED use and placement) Molatov Coctails for insurgents - creates fear lowers morale Road Blocks such as burning tyres, burnt out buses or cars More Flavour objects - traffic lights, street lighting etc Weather - storms, lightning, snow, hail - affects morale thus fighting ability. Signs of civilians - clothlines, civilian cars, potplants in front of houses, toys Regimental off map assets- Cruise missles, UAV's for spotting Combat Engineer Support to repair damaged vehicles Civilian and Military Amoured and un-Amoured Ambulances Realistic Tracer Loadouts

This is the thing about all suggestions on these forums they will all take varying degrees of development time, talent and money to bring to about. Battlefront however is one of the few developers that listen to their target market and genuinely care about the quality of their products. I like many others are continuely amazed about how far the game has come since its initial release. This effort has been through multiple patches mainly to fix bugs but many other community suggestions have also been implemented in these patches. Alot of enhancements in these patches have also dealt with improving both the realism and the immersion to this great game and I'am sure we will see more good things to come. So at the end of the day Battlefront like all other commercial ventures will weigh up any improvements or enhancements to CMSF based on a cost vs benefit analysis. That said there is no harm in giving them a few ideas that may benefit us all.

It seems many of you have missunderstood my intial proposition. What I'am advocating is not reducing the tracers in the game but adding them but in a more realistic way. Tracers are primmarily used for observation of fire, incendiary effects, signaling, and for training in the real world, therefore Iam suggesting that this should also be reflected in CMSF. For example the Red forces use the RPK series of machine gun which uses a green tracer (Bullet DESIGNATION of 57-T-231PM1). Likewise for the RPD and PK series of machine guns as well as the SVD and SVDS sniper rifles. These weapons all use 7.62mm green tracers. (TRACER BULLET DESIGNATION 7T2). Whereas the Blue force uses weapons such as M60, M219, and M240 machine guns these weapons use an Orange tracer (Type Classification: CON - MSR 11756003) The modern M249 machine gun uses a red tracer (Type Classification: STD - AMCTC 5055) or an Orange tracer (Type Classification: STD - MSR 05826002). Finally the M2 and M85 series of heavy machine guns use an orange tracer (Type Classification: STD - OTCM 37107) @Erwin.Rommel I also think the current tracer effects are too long and the ones in CMBB or CMAK are much better @ScubaSam I also agree that squad and team leaders should also be allocated tracers for the "Watch my tracer" fire control order, this again is realistic which also should improve the immersion of the game.

One thing I like about this community is that there is a mature approach to improving this great game. Its probably been mention before but I was wondering if there is any chance on seeing realistic tracers either in the next patch or the NATO module? I know that there are various tracer mods out there and the modders have done an excellent job, that said the mods tracer effects are depicted eminating from all weapons on both sides. The result is an unrealistic light show. What I think would be a more atmospheric and realistic approach is to limit tracer effects (red, green) to just MG's and HMG's and maybe CAS. The benefits of this approach is that it would also improve the immersion factor of the game as well.

All good stuff but personally I would like to see athentic distinctive tracers (Red & Green) for various large and small calibre MG's. Some of the mods do and excellent job at recreating the tracer feel, but it would be great to see different coloured tracers from both red & blue forces occuring at the same time. This effect could even be extended to CAS air support if proved successful on the ground.

Ok, Suggestions that could be in the realms of possibility could include real time day/night cycles whereby the sun,s postion and moon,s cycle would have to taken into account before taking an objective. The implementation of realistic weather such as fog, as this alone could have interesting ramifications on the battlefield. Destructable environments such as building rubble which snipers or AT teams could take advantage of. A non linear or branching campaign. An overall improvment to the interface (see the miriade of current suggestions) and an update to blufor and opfor AI so realistic QB is possible.

The idea of this thread was to give the developers of Battlefront, an idea of what hard core CM:SF players would like to see in the next CM:SF 2 title. I must say I'am quite surprised, that the number of dedicated hard core Battlefront fans that frequent this this forum, do not have any suggestions for the developers on what content they would like to see in the new up comming CM:SF 2 title.

I found some black eagle video, I thought you guys might like to see it it action. Unfortunately it is true this tank will not be fielded with the Russian army, as the T95 has that honour. It is however interesting to see where modern tank design is heading and is an alternate choice in a game like CM:SF 2, compared to your run of the mill T80's or T90's. Yes I agree not much is known about this tank, however with 125mm gun, low profile turrent and compartment based crew postions. It is clear however that this tank was designed to give western main battle tanks a run for there money. Sorry Sixxkiller, I must have miss read one of Steve's posts thought the modules were nearly done. Thanks for the informative insight into testing, I had no idea have much 'work' you guys have to do