Jonny(FGM)

Ok I know I know virtually nothing about the modern american military but havn't Spectre gunships been around for donkeys years and still in service?

Perhaps in this case that should be refined to "fight the battle your way, not the scenario designer way". I have started this mission so know the backstory, and the fighting through the woods is supposed to be not fighting the enemies way from the briefing, however being the rank amateur I am I could not even take the village without unacceptable casualties (to me anyway)

Hmmm it can't be minimum engagement range because the brad was firing off the top of a cliff and as such was still aiming a good 100m+ away from itself. It seems that you may have accidentally put correct minimum elevation in without realising it Being a bit of a n00b on these boards I apologise for going over old ground, especially seeing as steve has come in to clarify the issue, i fear I may have put back the release of CM:N by a few more hours.......

What am i doing wrong? I type the text into the text box provided, do i have to save it or something before i submit it? I'm using google chrome, is there any known issue with this vs IE/FF? I didn't fill in the quick description box because it was greyed out as i had the auto generate button selected

I had an ATI card for years, then when i got my new card i got an ATI, i had that for a day and after that all that it would do was turn its fan up to full (The PC wouldn't even finish booting up) so i traded it in for an NVIDIA. When i get my next build this will tempt me to go back to ATI but then again when the next round of drivers comes around NVIDIA might well have fixed this and ATI break it again. It seems we are basically at the mercy of the driver builders here

Thanks for that. I was sure i did enter a description but it must have got lost in the ether. I've resubmitted it (definitely with a description) with a new title so hopefully everything should be fine now : )

I gave up on this one after my JTAC got wiped out by a mortar strike. The radio operator survived but was then denied from calling in CAS and i didn't fancy having to wait 5 minutes minimum to call in my CAS. Personally this scen has too many red heavy weapons, I don't think there are too many .50 cal MGs knocking about in afghanistan (except the ISAF ones of course). Likewise I'd get rid of the mortars, while the opfor in afghanistan certainly do have plenty of mortars I'm pretty sure they are mainly used for harrasing fires and can't be used to create the sort of devestating fire mission that wiped out the force i sent for the high ground on the left. If you get rid of the mortars in a future version i might give this one another go.

I was sure I replied to this. Did my post get deleted or just lost? Anyways I am sure i added a description, however it is possible there was some other field that wasn't filled in, although i would have expected to have received and error rather than an "all done" message. I posted "UK-Untitled000" in the scenarios and campaigns section of the british forces part of the repository. I have no problem in posting it up again i just don't want to be bombarding you guys : )

When i deployed the brad in the editor i noticed it did the 90 degree dip over the cliff, so i just left it there. When i started the scenario the brad could reverse away from the cliff and then drive back into the same position.

Yes i've brought up the gun elevation thing in a seperate thread, this post was regarding the fact that the bradley seems to be magnetically attatched to the side of the cliff

It seems i've missed a big chunk of discussion over this. The only reason i brought it back up was that i saw steve said there should be maximum and minimum elevations already coded in and if they weren't working it was a bug and as the post was 2 years ago I thought an attempt would have been made to fix this so i just wanted to point out it hadn't been fixed if an attempt had been made to fix it, if that makes sense. Obviously it seems it is a "bug" but one that for whatever reason can't easily be worked out of the system

Well i certainly managed to find a gun depression limit on the bradley. That is a shame, i only brought it back up as i saw steve say that the guns were supposed to have a minimum depression and maximum elevation and if they didn't it was a bug.

Ok I hate to drag up an old thread like this but the max gun elevation on the M1 is still broken, the minimum depression on the bradley seems to have been fixed (I didn't test the minimum depression on the M1) but the M1 can still target the top of an 8 story building from the very base of it.

Ok while testing to see if the max/min gun elevation bug has been fixed (the minimum elevation seems to be ok on the bradley, but the max elevation on the M1 is still wrong, you get 120mm rounds firing at a 45 degree angle to the barrel) I noticed this Known bug or just a quirck of the the game engine?

Ah ok, thanks for that that should be handy to know. But do foxholes get this abstracted cover? I don't see any need to abstract the cover, simply make the foxholes deeper, but then i guess they'd be easier to spot by the enemy.

Really? I thought with the new 1:1 ballistics there is no such thing as abstracted cover any more?

How long does it take to add files to the repository? I added a file the other day and it's still not appeared. I filled in all my details and when i clicked the add button at the bottom of the form it took me to a page that said "all done" or something along those lines. Did i do something wrong or does it take a few days for files to be approved?

I personally quite like the AI behaviour when it comes to running over its own mines. I'm guessing in syria there are a lot of old minefields that unless you were in syrian military you wouldn't neccisarily know about, at least not know the exact location of the mines. However the AI sending troops into an arty barrage does just seem silly, mind you if they tweaked it so the AI had more autonomy i'm sure BF would get tons of complaints from scenario designers along the lines of "the AI won't follow my plans!!!! OMFG WTF?!?!?!?!" or some stuff

That's sort of what I was trying to say, I wasn't really saying that WEGO was an "afterthought" as such, just that the game obviously hasn't been designed around it. I'm just curious why they included RT at all

Surely the fact that WEGO specific issues had to be resolved in the first place shows that the game was designed for RT and then fudged to be WEGO to keep all us CMx1 vets happy. Of course i could be totally wrong and the game could have been designed for WEGO and fudged for RT but i somehow doubt it. PS i'm not having a dig at the game engine, overall it handles WEGO just as well as CMx1 did, I just find it strange that BF moved towards RT after stating they felt it became unmanagable above platoon level.

Wow that is minor! Can't be more than a few inches deep! Also i notice (I used a marine TOW platoon) that crew served weapons don't get them, well they get the holes they just don't occupy them

Ah i see, so if the side is defending they will have "foxholes" placed under them automatically? they don't need to be put in via the map editor like trenches?

From the manual I didn't see in either of those descriptions where the soldier who's unit has just been destroyed but carries on the fight fits in. Personally i'd put them in as combatants. The way I see it is that fighters are foreign personel who come in for "jihad", whereas the combatants are natives who just don't like the coalition being there. For an afghanistan analogy i'd say the Al-Quieda are Fighters and the taliban are combatants, although the afghanistan analogy probably doesn't hold up. I have made a scenario like this, you can make it fun by fiddling with the parameters, for example it's almost a given that the blue force will take the ground, but at what cost? If an uncon force managed to inflict even a 10% casualty rate on a conventional force that'd be at least a political victory.

Ok I know i'm rather sad but i was reading through the V1.11 feature list and found this How do you get foxholes? I looked in the map editor but couldn't find it anywhere

I presume you are only referring to arty support and not CAS? I think once the fire for effect radio message comes through it doesn't matter what happens to the FO the shells will fly until the mission is complete or cancelled