agusto

I made a couple of scenarios based on historical battles that took place in Syria recently. In most of them the player commands opposition forces (although playing as Syrian Armed Forces is possible in H2H), but in the one below a Syrian Army mechanized force is tasked with retaking some farms and a mountain pass captured by the insurgents (FSA + Jabhat Al-Nusra + Mujahideen): http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=2795 If you arent only interested paticularily in scenarios with the Syrian Civil War as background, try the Zawiya campaign by Mr.X. Although it is set in Libya i highly recommend it if you are into middle eastern goverment forces vs. insurgents battles.

The list you posted has the 1.10 and 1.21 only for the battlefront.com version, not for the other two. Battlefront.com patches: http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_versions&Itemid=221#Combat%20Mission:%20Shock%20Force%20%28PC%29 Paradox patches: http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_versions&Itemid=221#Combat%20Mission:%20Shock%20Force%20-%20Paradox%20Version Gamersgate patches: http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_versions&Itemid=221#Combat%20Mission:%20Shock%20Force%20-%20Gamersgate%20version Wich patches you need depends on where you purchased your game. Maybe you should make a copy of your save games/downloaded community generated content, do a clean reinstall of the game and then download and install the patches for you version again. Maybe you accidentially clicked a wrong item in the patches list and installed a wrong patch for your game. You could also try to just install the correct patches over the already installed patches and pray for it to work.

Sorry for off topic again, but i kinda like the discussion. The problem is that accelerating any mass-carrying object to speeds near the speed of light requires tremendous amounts of energy - for example an object with a mass of 10kg traveling at the 99,99% of the speed of light will have a kinetic energy of 450 Petajoule, wich is roughly equivalent to the energy released by a 100 Megaton nuclear device. That means that in theory you will have to invest at least that amount of energy in accelerating that object, practically you will have to invest much more due to energy losses during the process of aceleration because it wont work at 100% effeciency. When i was younger i really was into technical sci-fi set within physically correct universes, however i now find that beeing so focused on only the credibility of the techincal aspects really made me miss lots great sci-fi stuff. After all, all the Science in almost all Science-Fiction novels or movies is mostly fiction. It is almost all thought up, no matter how much detail the author gives about how the faster than light travel or the teleportation technology might work, it is just all fiction. IMO it is just as good as magic for explaining stuff that cant happen in the real world and it is only a matter personal taste weather or not someone prefers magic over the semi-fictional-technical explanation or the other way round. Regarding Sci-Fi, a good, thrilling story and good characters have become more important to me than technical credibility, although i still very much prefer a technical explanation over plain magic. I am very fine with BSG for example not at all explaining how the FTL might work, it just doesnt really matter or contribute to the development of the story or the characters, but i am still happy about the FTL beeing some sort of technical device instead of for example someones magical ability to teleport ships around in space. A Sci-Fi series i very much liked was the Seafort-Saga by David Feintuch. It doesnt get too much into the technical details of future technology but the how-to survive in space for long periods of time still plays an import role during the whole saga. Another Sci-Fi novel that mostly goes without technical explanations is Roadside Picnic by Boris Strugatsky. I also liked the movie Gattaca a lot. In all three Sci-Fi storys the how-technology-works is mostly irrelevant to the story, it is only relevant how the characters interact with the technology and how technology affects society. Oh, i really should start reading novels again. I probably havent read anything but technical/programming manuals for more than 2 years now. Maybe i am going to take a look at those novels you mentioned. The gravitational force behind the event horizon is so strong that none of the other three fundamental forces can resist the pull towards the center of mass of the black hole, hence a black hole has all its mass concentrated in a single point of infinitely high density and infinitly small expansion. From the perspective within the black hole, when you are part of that point, there is nothing that could described as as space or time, left alone something like expansion.

Did you install the correct patches? AFAIK there are three versions of the patches up to and including 1.20: the battlefront.com, the paradox and the gamersgate version. Maybe you DLed the wrong patch for your game. It is a bit speculative, but that could be the reason for your key not working anymore.

Probably the weapon of choice in future space battles is going to be the laser. Why the laser? Without any cover or concealment and detection systems beeing capable of detecting incoming objects hundreds of thousands of kilometers away, the laser will be the only weapon that cant be defeated by active protection systems or CWIS like weapons. Any guided or unguided projectile or missile will be detected long before its impact and will destroyed far away from its target (for example, by a laser like the one mounted on the Boeing YAL-1). Laser, on the other hand, will be noticed by the target only at very the moments it hits - nothing is faster than light, and laser is light. I doubt though that battles between ships will take places a distances like lightyears. A laser that is fired at a target that is 1 lightyear away will take exactely 1 year until it hits its target, quite a long time for the target to maneuver away from the predicted aimpoint. Anyways, i like space combat in Battlestar Galactica the way it is - at super close range and personal, with space fighter pilots literally beeing able to see the white in the eyes of their oponents.

That is a good idea, really. I can very well imagine a simplified 2D off-map area to work with the current CMx2 system.

How about Medvieal II Total War? It isnt particularly complex, but IIRC set in the right time period. Oh, and talking about the codpiece: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/images/interceptor-deltoid-image1.jpg

I wonder if we are going to see something like that in CMBS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_Rocket,_Artillery,_and_Mortar http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAK22XkEa-o They basically took the technology used on warships to shoot down incoming anti-ship missiles and modified it so it can take down incoming artillery rounds as well.

Really? It looks like he registered on 12-22-2007 and got banned on 4-15-2008: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=939538#post939538 During that time he made 13,965 posts: http://www.battlefront.com/community/member.php?u=11 But whatever, maybe the forum statistics are wrong. There is no way a human beeing that needs food and sleep could post that much.

I just googled Michael Dorosh and found that during his 5 months stay on the battlefront.com forums he posted more than 13.000 times :eek:. LOL. That makes 86 posts per day. If he hadnt been banned he would today probably have posted more than John Kettler and Michael Emrys togather.

It is not a science either, though. I am certain that if ISIS gets it hands on an operable SA-11 system, they will get someone who can operate it soon. Either a defector, a captive, or simply someone bought with money. A couple of million dollars can buy you a lot of knowledge.

I was specifically looking for a game like Theatre of War set in a modern day scenario, preferably set in Iraq/Afgahnistan. I googled for such a game and was re-directed to an article about CMSF in a computer games magazine.

AFAIK ISIS has released a total of 4 propaganda vids, each of them one hour long. I watched one of them. Approximnately 15 mins of the video are AFV kills and combat footage, the rest is a mix of propaganda, torture, abductions, people digging their own graves, public executions and drive by shootings. ISIS are absolutely horrible, as bad as the Nazis IMO. I dont recommend watching any of those vids. I am not going to post a link because of the very graphic violence, but i am going to send you a PM. EDIT: Talking about the combat footage, ISIS seems to rely a lot on IEDs and the lack of experience/competence of the iraqi forces. Several kills in the video i sent you seem to be the result of the severe carelessness of the iraqi soldiers involved.

Or things could go like Somalia where the civil war is still raging after 23 years of constant fighting.

Wings: Over Flanders Fields looks fun. If you are used to F-16s and the like, it is almost unbelieveable how air combat was back then .

LOMAC is more of an air combat sim, so if you like flight sims and air combat, it is fun to play. It is quite stressfull though and it has a steep learning curve. You not only have to fly your own aircraft but you simultaniously have to handle the complex radar and weapon controls, be aware of the situation in the air and on the ground around you and make life-or-death tactical decisions. All of that often while beeing immensely pressed for time.

Ahh, okay. Thanks for the info.

John, how do you know it is a T-54 and not a T-55? They look very similar to me.

At least it is a T-55 this time (i think). It is slightly more modern than the IS-3 we saw in the previous videos: It has a stabilized gun (in theory at least, i doubt they are going to get it to work) and since the Ukrainian army has T-55 tanks in storage as well there might be a chance the Seperatists can loot some ammunation. Below are the armor and ammo storage scheme of the T-55: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-QNcoPfBwJmc/ULeQy7a91TI/AAAAAAAADvE/xJxUu8P3Zes/s1600/T-55-Armor-1.jpg http://www.kotsch88.de/allgemeines/geschichte_t-72/t-54/T55-D14.jpg Armor wise it is doing as bad as the IS-3. Possibly they would be better off selling the T-34s and the IS-3 to collectors and buying RPGs and AKs with the money instead.

That reminds me that i should reinstall Graviteams tank simulator Steel Armor:Blaze of War again. Last time i played it was an aweful experience because my old PC couldnt handle it. I guess it s going to be more fun to play with more than 10 frames per second.

IMO sieges work as good as in Rome 1. I recently finished my first 500+ turn conquer-the-world-campaign as Rome and i havent experienced any problems with sieges so far (although i havent been on the receiving end too often, so possibly the AI has problems with attacking settlements that i havent encountered yet). Naval battles are as good as in the previous parts, just a bit more chaotic (wich is naturally, given the rarety of ranged weapons and the necessity of melee combat), but once one got used to it, command and control isnt a problem. Internal politics could be more detailed, but they are far from beeing useless as many often claim. Basically the internal politics in Rome 2 require you to spend money on them in order to delay the occurance of the civil war event and they allow you to buff some of your characters (in exchange for money). They only thing i miss in Rome 2 that was in Rome 1 is the family tree screen.

I am different, i like the pain that detailed combat sims often bring with them. What has turned me off from buying SB ever since i heard of it is the price: 160$ for the game + the manual + the upgrade (whatever this might be)?

That is one of the reasons for why i usually wait for the first couple of patches before buying a newly released game. Buying initial release versions just got me frustrated too often, especially when a game has great potential but the sheer sum of little problems kills all the fun. It' s been similar with Rome Total War 2 and Hearts of Iron 3, after the first couple of patches they are now pretty good.

How large is the map? Is the map complex (lots of buildings, trees, elevation changes etc)? If it is very complex, try reducing complexity and size, it may significantly improve performance. Especially buildings reduce performance a lot. You could also try to reduce texture quality directly in your graphics driver menu. Just a little . I dont i think my PC could handle that battle either.

Cant be done unfortunately, at least not by the modding community. Vehicles stats and models are hardcoded, only textures can be modified. If you are 80s WW3 wargames though check out Flashpoint Campaigns Red Storm, it is pretty cool.