agusto

The only thing better about CM is that you can save the replay and go over the best minutes over and over again .

Welcome to the forum Badwolf66.

Za rodinu! on a 2017 tank seem to be a bit anachronistic to me. Anyways i think you will like this video, jomni: Vpjerjod!

Is it supposed to be black? I thought they were all green, with yellow markings. Possibly you caught some missing textures there.

The problem probably arent the newcomers themselves, it is that some questions get asked over and over and over again and you always have to tell them "no, that wont happen". Some people here have been a part of this community for over 16 years, i can understand why they might feel a bit enerved by the 7234 iteration of the "can we get a better AI" or "the graphics suck" discussion. Hmm - yes and no. What would you expect? Any game community probably consists mostly if not only of people that actually like the game they are playing.

Technically the term artificial intelligence is an oxymoron when used to describe CPU controlled opponents in computer games. The way "AI" in games works is that it is programmed to immitate intelligent behaviour in a certain set of predefined situations. If the game-AI faces a situation that is not part of its predefined program, it will fail to act appropriately. And it will not only fail to act appropriately in that single situation, it will also fail to modify its behaviour in such a way that it will be able to handle similar situations better in case they are encountered again at some point in the future. I have played a lot of other games that have a dynamic AI and i have also programmed some myself (which, admittedly, were quite simple, but still helped me to improve my understanding) and that is exactely the reason why i prefer the way CM handles things. A pre-defined plan made by a competent scenario designer will easily be much more realistic and effective than any sort of dynamic AI that BFC could realistically implement. What we need in CM regarding the "AI" are more complex triggers togive scenario designers the tools to make better pre-defined plans.

i voted #1/10$ and #2/5$. I agree with Baneman who said: If BFC manages it do make an AI that is truely capable of beeing aware of itself and the situation around it and play CMBS as a good as or even better than a human, DoD would probably pay them millions and millions $ though. But given that the most advanced AIs that currently exists on planet earth are compareably as sentient as a tapeworm, that is rather unlikely to happen. I think that it is just not worth for BFC to invest time in making a dynamic AI. Give us more complex triggers with if-then-or-else capabilities, that should be sufficient.

It needs to be noted though that ArmA2 has a particularily autonomous AI. Some AI mods even allow the AI to operate completely autonomous.

Hmm. I always point new players to the Armchair General tactisc tutorial videos. They were made using CMBN, but the basics of tactics havent changed much since then. Here is the first video of 5:

The US forces have a a thermal rifle scopoe than can see through fog IIRC. It is called the TWS (Thermal Weapon Sights) or LWTS (Light Weight Thermal Sights).

I recommend you play Veteran or Basic Training if you are new to CM. Borg Spotting and instant artillery support are major advantages for the player. Youi possibly should also start with small battles and play them in Real Time. WeGo takes a bit of getting accustomed to it, but during larger battles (everything bigger than a company) it is much more comfortable than RT for most people.

Fruit Gum, Sugar Jacket, Combat aka FGSJC wouldnt sound tasty anyways. FGSJC even sounds likely a deadly weapon.

helloheywhatsnew, according to several polls we had over the past couple of years, the average age of the community is approximately 40 years. Also this: is by far the most agressive and disrespectful comment anyone in this thread has made yet. It is disrespectful because it generally devalueates the opinions of all people older than you as crap and it incorrectly makes the generalized assumption that people older than you are incapable of keeping pace with technological developments. Furthermore you seem to confuse your own personal taste with knowledge, disproportionally even calling it "education" to tell people what you think they should like. I am genuinely sorry that you have MS, but trying to invoke pity in order to discourage people from stateing opinions that disagree with yours is quite a dishonourable and weak rethorical tactic. Basically that is why i dont think it would be interesting (or, with other words, not worth the effort it would take to implement the feature). You can just take a look at the AI plans in the editor if you want to how it works and reacts. But watching a scripted AI fight itself is really just like c3k said it: two blind men with bulldozers fighting eachother.

Well in the end it all comes down to a mathematical/logical formula that handles all the possible if-then and with-what relations. That is just the way computer programs work. If gun = 100mm_BMP3 => vehicle_modifier = 0 => vehicle_modifier*r*s*f*m*cs*a = l with if l = 0 => always lase target. And now the formula factors in all the stuff that we have mentioned and returns a result that tells you whether or not the target will be lased. The real difficulty of pogramming a simulation is to figure out a logical/mathematical system that sufficiently abstracts reality to allow state of the art computers to handle the workload while still maintaining a reasonable level of accuracy. You must abstract, modelling a 1:1 representation of physical reality is impossible.

Can you even open the hatches from outside? Isnt there some sort of mechanism that locks it from inside?

I dont know if vehicle deployed smoke grenades can ricochet from obstacles in their path. If that is the case we might have explanation for the vehicles front not beeing covered.

Takign out light vehicles with .50 cal is great fun. Much more satisfying than blowing them up IMO. I mean just imagine the carnage that those rounds caused in the crew compartment when they hit the BTR!

Russian vehicles usually deploy their some screen further away than their american counterparts, but i dont know if 90 meters is normal. I have never measured it.

I had fairly good experiences with arty calls and UAVs. Usually everything goes as expected, the target is hit quickly and accurately. My personal favorite are those laser guided rounds fired from on-map mortars. Under ideal circumstances the time between me calling the mission and the rounds hitting the target is just a bit over 60 seconds.

I laughed at the part with the two blind men fighting with bulldozers. It is just true .

Yeah, the projectiles from the gun of the the BMP-3 have an awkward flight path . Almost like a mortar shell. But you can factor in the vehicle type too, just as a another 0 or 1 factor.

I disagree. According to http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/cv/weapon/M256.html, the M830A1 has a muzzle velocity of 1400m/s - only 200ms slower than the M829A1 APFSDS projectile. I havent done the math yet, but i am pretty sure that at ranges below 1000 meteres drop will be neglectable to such a degree that sights with a fixed range can be used. For comparision: the german WW2 PzGr.39 APCBC-HE for the 88 mm gun of the Tiger I had a muzzle velocity of only 773 m/s and only half the mass of the 120mm HEAT round of the M1A2 and still the 700m (or actually even 1000m rule) rule was used. I can even give you a source for that: http://www.bills-bunker.de/media//DIR_111001/4203297340c99131ffff817fac144225.pdf It says there (roughly translated): "With sights set to 1000m, you will hit every 2m target between 0 and 1000m (if you sit the target correctly on the needle of the sights)". Page 77 in adobe acrobat.

Well you could take a look at one of the maps with 1 red and 1 blue AI plan in the editor and then execute each AI plan in hotseat mode manuallly. I dont think it would be interesting, but that is probably the closest thing you can get to what you want.

Youn are absolutely right. I hope BFC tweaks lazing at some point in the future.

Hmm. I find scenario very difficult. I picked off 5 of the approaching T-90s before they could reach the valley with ATGMs and another 2 were killed by precision arty after they had reached the valley. Some were degraded by artillery too. No losses on my side. But now, i am 1:15 hours in the scneario, i have got approximately 2 enemy tank companies sitiing in a reversed slope position in front of me and i have absolutely no idea what to do. Any attack would be suicide IMO. I am hitting them with artillery but i dont have enough of it to kill them all. Any ideas? Maybe crawl some Javelins up? Tactically the situation is a worst case scenario for the Blue forces.