Ultradave
-
Posts
3,854 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
20
Posts posted by Ultradave
-
-
Also, one other thing to ask/check. Do you have any anti-virus software running that might have interfered with the installation or changed permissions? If so, try temporarily turning off the anti-virus while installing. Then it's fine to turn it right back on again.
-
45 minutes ago, OlafP said:
That's great to hear. I would still like to lobby against infantry opening fire on tanks with rifles, though, but I guess that's a whole different can of worms to open.
I just ran it again, and checked. The Sherman they spot is opened up. The German troops took a couple shots at it, hit the turret, it closed up and they stopped firing. To me, I think that's an ok response. Chance they could have hit the TC.
-
5 hours ago, OlafP said:
Yes, here it is: https://ufile.io/tx7n7
Thanks for this. This helps a lot. I ran your saved game using my FB 2.0 installation and saw the same behavior you did, just slightly different end results but pretty much the team running around panicked.
Then I loaded it in the patched beta version of FB and the behavior was markedly improved. In fact, I'd say, exactly what you would want. The team stopped at that row of bushes (not really a hedgerow), either kneeling or prone, took a couple shots at an enemy soldier in the stone courtyard in front of them, who then appeared to run off, then took a couple rifle shots at a Sherman that suddenly appeared far off through the trees - presumably to make it button up. Then they hunkered down. All four guys in the same place, no running in circles, screaming and shouting. Proper behavior.
That should cut through the remainder of the above discussion.
-
-
On 2/12/2019 at 4:28 PM, Sublime said:
lotsa pirated games.
Maybe I'm wrong, but this doesn't seem like something you'd want to admit in a public forum.
-
8 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
Thanks for sharing, +1. Interesting. I thought walking into an ambush at 50m range would be certain death to most of the ambushed party within a couple of seconds, but of course reality is not always like I imagine.
Well, yes, you are certainly right, however, probably LESS certain death than hunkering down right in place to be picked off, or running backwards unable to return fire. So it's really more the case of the least terrible option. If you've been properly ambushed by someone who knew what they were doing, you are already in a world of hurt and it's really your only viable option, on the chance that their survival instinct is greater than yours and they break and run.
But yeah, overall you are right. It's a bad day no matter how you look at it.
-
1 hour ago, coachjohn said:
I like the indirect. In today’s satellite era - we can place ordinance anyplace with a sighted.
Doesn't need to be present day with all the cool toys either. I was an artillery officer, before the days of GPS and digital anything, so my experience is actually much closer to WW2 and Korean War techniques than present day. We would call fire on grid coordinates that were not observable. You can calculate firing data to anywhere. Look at the map, hear some vehicle noises and conclude they MUST be coming down that road that's behind the treeline. Of course, both in CM and real life, you could be way off, but it takes no longer to compute firing data to an unobserved point than to an observed target. Either way, the FO is passing grid coordinates. The difference is that unobserved, you FFE immediately. No adjustments possible. Another example would be looking at the map and making an educated guess as to where their mortars are set up, like at the edge of a far treeline. Linear FFE on the treeline.
Now normally on offense or defense you would have recalculated TRPs, and then could call shift missions off of those, and you can do that in game. Not too many scenarios give you TRPs, but in QB they are certainly available to purchase.
So there's my FA perspective, from someone who was a FIST Chief, Battery Fire Direction Officer, Brigade Fire Support Officer, FA Battalion Asst S-3 (S-3 is operations), and Battalion Fire Direction Officer. I've called for, planned, calculated a whole lot of explosions (this pedigree is for the guy in the other thread who seems to be under the impression that BF had never talked to a military or former military person
)
-
Hard to choose. I think that the choice is which theater you have the most interest in, Eastern or Western front. Both have lots of content, good graphics, and quite a bunch of mods and user created content if you are interested in that.
-
17 minutes ago, Jaskier said:
Battlefront has multiple cases which should be internally investigated and results presented.
They did and they did.
-
Well that was disappointing. Draw. I had troops across the river on the right, knocked out 2 AT guns, 2 MGs, and got credit for none of them. No friendly casualties. Not sure what happened, but I think I did better than a draw. Oh, well. On to the next challenge.
-
1 hour ago, Thewood1 said:
I know that. That's why I was asking if anyone actually sees that. Was wondering if anyone has actually saw it. I'm not talking about generic players. I was hoping someone would comment that has actually played campaigns and scenarios with personal observations'.
Yes, definitely. I'm more cautious and take more time than in a standalone scenario, which results in fewer casualties to the friendlies. I should do more of the same approach in scenarios, but, it's hard not to just push a little harder because you're *almost* there, and before you know it, you're not.
-
Testing is happening. (how's that for saying nothing?
)
Don't forget it's not one patch, it's one for each title.
-
13 hours ago, IanL said:
That would be fun - I agree.
Yuck and Yuck
But that's just my opinion.
There was a scenario (CMBN or one of it's variants, maybe it was back in CMBO days) where the scenario designer recommended only using first person view and tabbing between units. It was a paratroop unit scattered on landing and tasked with taking a small village. It was incredibly hard to keep oriented and accomplish the task. Fun for a change. Obviously there was no way to enforce it except your own willpower.
-
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
IP.S. European banking has been ahead of US banking technology for many, many years. Don't believe me? As a European what a check/cheque is and see what answer you get
Steve
While living in England we had to specifically request checks. They don't normally give them. But there were occasions when we did need them. Seldom, though. We have chip and pin cards YEARS before we finally got them here. Dinner at a pub - if there is a server, they come to you with the card processor, hand it to you for your pin, or print a credit slip. Your card never leaves your hand or your sight. Ever. This was some years ago now.
On the other hand, we asked our neighbors once, "Is it just us or are the banks incompetent, but you can do almost anything at the Post Office? I needed to wire money back to my account in the US (to stay under the limit for foreign accounts from the US). Local bank branch couldn't do it. Had to go to the more major branch in Barrow. They couldn't figure it out. I had all the exact information SWIFT code, intermediary bank and account. My US bank is USAA and they are really good with international stuff as you might expect. I literally had to show them how to fill out their own form. This was Barclay's (at the time - the second largest bank in the world). The branch in Barrow said they had never had to wire money before. Seriously. I told them I found that impossible to believe. There were 17 Americans there for years. Most banked at that bank. I KNOW they've wired money home. "We don't usually do this you know". Wanted to reach over and slap them. "It's a service you offer. You advertise it. Prominently. RIGHT THERE (up on the wall) I want to wire money to the US. So PLEASE can we?"
Chip and pin - years ahead. Much more secure. EVERYTHING ELSE BANKING - the dark ages. (at least in the UK).
-
2 hours ago, IanL said:
I should have been clearer. I was *not* commenting on the pistols part of the previous post. I was referring to officers taking rifles when they were officially assigned an SMG.
Until about 1988 the battle rifle used by Canadian infantry was the FN C1. It was a large 7.62 semi automatic and officers were officially assigned a much smaller SMG - the C1 SMG which was basically a Sterling. They didn't like having the different weapon even if it was smaller. It was just to different and they would stand out because of it. Or perhaps some of them just liked the FN a lot.
The FN was nice. Reminded me of our M-14s. (we did an exchange with an artillery battery of the Parachute Regt - traded people for 40 days). As a 2LT and 1LT I had an M-16 issued. Only one .45 per battery and that was the battery commander's. As a CPT I had a M-16 as a Brigade Fire Support Officer, in spite of being back in the Bde TOC. Later as Artillery Bn, Asst S-3 and S-3 had a .45, AND an M-16.
The difference with some of the previous accounts about .45s might be that I was in the 82d Airborne. We tended to be always ready to suddenly become the front lines. You know the line from Maj. Dick Winters "We're paratroopers son. We're supposed to be surrounded."
-
Ok, here's a couple:
1. Vehicles get dropped from airplanes (called "heavy drop"). Rigged with several parachutes, they are strapped to steel platform skids, with honeycomb cardboard crushable padding. The battery commander's jeep and trailer (with all his belongings), each get one small skid and parachute. Occasionally we lose a vehicle when the chutes malfunction. Occasionally. Two drops in a row, the only casualty was the BC's trailer. Tent, all his personal gear for a deployment... BOOM. Upside down. Nothing but the flat bottom of the skid visible. Two times in a row. On another occasion it was the #3 gun. #3 is always the senior gun chief, and the gun we use for registering the batter, adjusting fire before FFE. They are the most experienced and best performing gun. SSGT Perry was looking for his gun. Its parachutes had detached as it slid out of the plane and it fell 1200'. BOOOOM. Upside down into the sandy drop zone. SSGT Perry almost started to cry when we told him "It's under there. That's your gun." It ended up on display in the motor pool after they dug it out. It was about a foot tall, wheels out sideways, gun tube cracked in the middle and driven down into the chassis. Incidentally, it's for this reason that in training the vehicles drop first, then the people drop. In a real situation you'd drop the people first to secure the drop zone, then the vehicles, but as you can see, that can be dangerous.
2. Two gun raid. An artillery battery is comprised of 6 guns. In the 82d, back then we had M102 105mm howitzers. Nice guns. Towed by M561 Gamma Goats. But being a 105 the range is somewhat limited. A two gun raid takes two guns, and a couple of people from the Fire Direction Center (the LT and one enlisted man) forward with the two guns. The FDC LT gets to play Fire Direction Officer and XO at the same time (calculate the firing data and lay the guns). The guns get slung with enough ammo for the mission, the two gun crews and us (The FDC - I was the LT), ride the 2 Blackhawks that are carrying the guns (Hueys early on but then it took 4 to do it). Placed forward in the front lines to be able to hit a lucrative target in the enemy rear, you set up, shoot, and rig up to be removed again, all very fast. In peacetime, Ft. Bragg, NC, you have strict range safety. A firing box to fire into from a specific surveyed firing point. When the helicopters set us down and flew off, the senior gun chief and I huddled with a map and quickly realized they had set us down on the wrong spot. We were a mile down the road from where we should be (and where I had safety data for), with no transportation. Radio silence, the choppers would return in 30 minutes. So we lay the guns, calculated the data and dry fired for the practice. No live rounds - that would have been a disaster. Had we fired the mission as given from the wrong location we would have fired rounds onto a road. A real road. Luckily the sergeant and I were familiar enough with the area that we could tell we weren't in the right place. If it was real it wouldn't have been much better because back then with no GPS, you are dependent on doing your own survey. We were in the trees with no readily usable landmarks. Who knows where the rounds would have gone, except not where the target was. And in real life we may not have recognized the error.
3. And I've already told the story of the final protective fires. Danger close with infantry company mortars (I was a FIST Chief then). Rounds kept creeping closer to us. They were already close and getting closer. So we radioed "Check Fire" and received the reply "Rounds Complete". Mortars are quick firing with a long time of flight. There were still about 15 rounds in the air. We bugged out. The last rounds hit our former position. The mortar baseplates were sinking in wet ground with every shot, causing the tube to rise, which shortens the range. They hadn't noticed until it was over. So we had good FPF fire but had to retreat in a hurry anyway. This one could easily be applicable to CM games due to the close quarters of most battles.
Not very exciting stories, but examples of if something can go wrong it will.
-
4 hours ago, sburke said:
yep pretty much. As long as the game has a tactical AI there will always be times when you say "wtf?". And in RL there are plenty of those moments. What I'd love about now is for our vet forum members to tell some of their best "wtf?" moments. Entertaining and it would put a more realistic spin on this discussion.
Yes. I have some. But most resulted in people getting killed so I'd just as soon leave those and not rehash. Leave it to your imagination. Our division commander was a big fan of Murphy's Laws and made up his own to go along with airborne operations. To the point we got sick of hearing of them. But in general, the maxim that says that no plan survives first contact with the enemy could not be more true.
I'll see if I can come up with a few from training/peacetime ops that were more interesting and not fatal.
Dave
-
7 minutes ago, Ridaz said:
Oh I see, what about other version of WW2 like FI and RT or FB are those affected by this bug. Also I read somewhere that the CMBN mission are not updated to 4.0 whcih caused some imba gameplay.
CMBN is engine 4. I just picked an example that I'm right now currently playing. My experience has been similar with FI, and FB. I haven't really played RT in a while, but I don't expect it would be any different. They are all engine 4
I'm just giving my opinion in reaction to those who state that it's a "game-breaking" issue. I don't believe it is, and I've had loads of satisfaction with all the titles. Anyone is free to disagree.
-
13 hours ago, Ridaz said:
Looks like I'll just hold off from buying CMBN until they fix these issues.
To add to this, I agree with completely with sburke. Others' descriptions of "game breaking" IMO are a bit of hyperbole. It by no means makes every scenario and campaign unplayable. Far from it. There is a ton of great content, especially if you go for the bundle with CW and MG. That being said, as Steve said, the patch will be out after SF2 and SF2 is now out, so you shouldn't have long to wait if you decide to wait it out, (assuming testing the patch goes ok).
HOWEVER, I would not expect that a patch will magically make all soldiers in all circumstances stand and fight to the death inside a building or trench line, or even prevent every instance of poor decision making. It should help. But much like real combat, behavior under fire can be unpredictable. It should however, help with troops in good cover breaking and running amok out in the open.
As an example, I'm currently playing the "Road to Nijmegan" campaign again in BN and having a great time. My paratroopers are behaving rationally, and I haven't seen any suicidal behavior from them. They've at times been pinned down. One squad broke and ran back 100yds, but they did happen across a MG34 in cover that opened fire at close range. Discretion is the better part of valor. The described behavior I would classify as a sometime annoyance, rather than "game-breaking." It doesn't bother me much and I haven't even run across it that often.
Dave
-
By the recon being done before the battle simply means you know the general location of the enemy force. Recon teams as small and can move around ahead and locate the DETAIL of the enemy positions, many times preventing a whole squad from walking into a buzz saw, or giving you a better idea of dispositions so that you can plan where you want to go.
When I don't have actual recon teams, I usually break out scout teams from squads to do the same thing. Better for 2 or 3 guys to find the bad guys the hard way than a squad or platoon.
-
2 hours ago, Chops said:
Thanks guys -
1. Is there any supporting documentation that describes exactly what was changed in the Engine 4.0 patch for CMSF2? When a patch is released it is common practice to include documentation describing what was included in the patch. So I would simply like to know specifically what was changed, as it took over a year for this patch to be released.
My understanding is that in the original Engine 4.0 update, the behavior of troops under High Explosive (HE) fire was changed, in order to make their behavior more realistic. However, it actually caused them to leave good cover, and run into the open. So, was their behavior changed back to what it was originally in the Engine 4.0 update, or were additional changes made in the new Engine 4.0 patch?
2. Additionally, where is the documentation for the CMSF2 v2.01 patch? As I mentioned previously, no file was included with the CMSF2 installation.
The patches in the past have always come with release notes in a README.txt file.
-
8 hours ago, Rokko said:
Since this is somewhat related: The boxed version of CMSF1 had a map of Syria with all the forces involved in the fictional campaign and their operations depicted. Is this map somewhere in the documentation of the digital CMSF2 version? So far I haven't found it.
Good point. I thought that was going to be included in the distribution. It exists as a pdf. I'll ask.
-
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yes it was a long time ago
Since we're already down memory lane, a month or so ago I was in Halifax reminiscing with someone about watching Creature Double Feature on Chanel 56 and the Bruins on Chanel 38. We had a Millennial at the table and we found ourselves having to explain UHF. Ah, life was so much simpler back then when a bit of tinfoil was all one needed to fix a signal problem. Then again, I get to watch all those Creature Double Feature movies WITH inspired commentary on Netflix's recently rebooted MST3K, so there is that.
Steve
The Movie Loft on Channel 38. Great old movies with commentary about the filming and the actors. Watched it ALL THE TIME!
But that's just my opinion.
Since we're already down memory lane, a month or so ago I was in Halifax reminiscing with someone about watching Creature Double Feature on Chanel 56 and the Bruins on Chanel 38. We had a Millennial at the table and we found ourselves having to explain UHF. Ah, life was so much simpler back then when a bit of tinfoil was all one needed to fix a signal problem. Then again, I get to watch all those Creature Double Feature movies WITH inspired commentary on Netflix's recently rebooted MST3K, so there is that.
Just bought, won't work, "Assertion Error"
in Combat Mission Shock Force 2
Posted
When you get this error do you get a pop up box with any other info in it? Or is is just a small box with Assertion Error in it? If it's a larger box, can you post a screen pic of it? If not, then, well, never mind
Seems like these are usually caused because something is either missing or can't be found (path issue). If the error box had anything else it might be a clue to where to look.
Dave