Jonny(FGM)

Me thinks someone needs to make map converter for CMSF

Kiwi, I think what you are suggesting is going to be included in NATO. If not i think it's been announced it's going to be in in normandy

But it's Nvidia who have broke their drivers with the implementation of the openGL, if BF were to tweak the openGL protocols then it'd probably break it for people with ATI cards.

Highly doubt it, i think it's a Nvidia problem not a BF problem

I've seen the first problem twice in PBEM games, once with air support and once with artillery rounds. It's not limited to PBEM as i saw it happen in a WEGO single player game yesterday.

If the IFV has 3 crew members then usually someone moves up to the gunner seat if the gunner gets his head blown off, if it's a 2 man job then the driver can't drive and shoot ; ) Some of the british and perhaps a few of the american vehicles can use passengers to man the crew served weapon on the top of it

I'm pretty sure we're going to get CQC modelled in CM:N (i'm sure it has been mentioned in a bone somewhere) bayonets n all, but i think the amount of work it would take to model the multitude of ways in which you can take out a bunker and how often bunkers actually had to be taken out doesn't really make it worth it. I for one would take bayonets over grenades through the firing slit.

I think the main problem is, due to the action square system it's not possible to model hugging the side of the bunker and 2 soldiers either side just quickly pop round and throw a grenade in. I remember bunkers in CMx1 were a bit of a pain too.

I doubt it, i think we have to wait for a new base game for this type of stuff.

Embedded youtube videos would be nice . . . . . . . . .

There's a muzzle flash and explosions mod on the repository which is a must IMO

Have you never used the search bar at the top? I type in what im looking for and usually have it within minutes if not seconds.

While the 1:1 representation may make the resolution seem less than CMx1, i think it is just explicitly showing what CMx1 abstracted, or at least i think of it that way While it is true that the manual is hardly a comprehensive guide to playing the game it's certainly worth a good read.

I love the CM manuals (if im correct, we didn't get one until CMAK?), i find they help me with understanding the game, I don't know why i allways play the game for ages first and then go read the manual and be all "oh, so THAT'S why that unit was doing that" : )

Just my $0.02 I liked playing the old ops, despite their shortcomings, but i also like playing the campaigns, allbeit that most are too long to realisticly play H2H I think the new campaign system was the right choice for the Modern Setting, add in persistent map damage (we already have a core forces file, perhaps a core map file would be a good way to go) and someway to calculate front lines when the same terrain is used twice, then we'd have a (near) perfect campaign system. But hell, i've waited so god damn long for CM:N i'd be happy with just being able to play WW2 scenarios with the fantastic new engine : )

Actually apart from the units which cannot target (which are quite limited in number) i find determining LOS a lot easier in CMx2 as you can determine it from the destination as well as the start point.

I do know you can mod the shortcuts, i've just never got round to doing it, i've only just got used to the new layout so I think changing it again is more hassle than it is worth. Does it even get around the panel problem though? IE i'm hitting a key but it's doing nothing because i have the wrong panel selected? The main point is I shouldn't have to mod them, they should have stuck with the brilliant CMx1 system

I believe it is in Normandy (or was announced that it would be in normandy), don't know about Afghanistan

Surely the same volume of data is sent during RT battles though? And it'd still be quicker than trying to do it PBEM

+10000000000000000000000000000000000000 I don't get it, we have WEGO, we have TCP/IP, surely WEGO TCP/IP is basically PBEM but instead of saving a file it just gets sent straight down the internet?

Here we go. The entire video is worth a watch but the relevant bits are from about 4:30 onwards

Im just wondering if watching too many clips of special forces at work has clouded many peoples judgement of how real MOUT fights happen, I'm going to go find a youtube clip to demonstrate this . . . . .

It went out with the old engine. From a tactical standpoint it doesn't matter because there are no penalties for deleting and replotting waypoints like there were in CMx1, but obviously from a user friendliness/annoyingness standpoint it does matter. Although I can't say I miss them that much.

No, you're not the only one. I think they had pretty much UI perfection in CMx1 and I don't know how they managed to butcher it so badly for CMx2, my main problem is with the seperate panels, fine for sorting them into different types of commands, but the fact that some commands share keys just makes it annoying. Also the group command does suck, it seems like when you select multiple units and click on a waypoint it tries to send them all to the same one. One thing i will say is that the tac AI is a lot more forgiving if you do mess your road movement plots up, if vehicles drive up each others backsides then the vehicles tend to just pause until a gap opens up instead of trying to drive around which got really frustrating in CMx1. Plus there is the fact that there are no command delays so if the 2nd vehicle in the convoy gets bogged for a sec you don't have to cancel the commands of the other units in order to sort things out again.

According to CMBB the PzIVJ has 30mm flat side armour, the PTRD can penetrate 34mm at 100m, so it would be a bit iffy as to whether in most situations the PTRD could penetrate in the fist place. My guess would be that it was mainly there to help reduce armour flaking etc.