Jump to content

gnarly

Members
  • Posts

    595
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by gnarly

  1. 10 hours ago, John Kettler said:

    If we don't get loopholes, then BFC needs, methinks, to give us real tables, crates and such to elevate deployable weapons high enough they can see and shoot. There are lots of examples of this in videos from Syria and elsewhere. Weapon tripods are simply too short to allow firing from most windows. Have also seen stuff where snipers do they exact same thing so they can shoot prone but away from the window, sometimes with a scrim interposed. 

    Regards,

    John Kettler

    JK et al.

     

    Aside from the occassional issues one sees with LOS blockages as per thread, I am pretty certain I've read elsewhere that the deployment of heavy weapons in buildings does take into account dragging tables into place, DIYing an elevated platform to position the tripod/bipod correctly for a window etc.

     

    This is, if I recall, is reflected in the significantly longer deploy times in buildings; i dont have game access atm, but i think say an MG may deploy in a field in 20 seconds, but say over 2 minutes in a building.

  2. 1 hour ago, Artemis258 said:


    I'm with sttp on going with the newer rather than the older... unless you have a special attachment to boccage fighting or the normandy/market garden ops, Final Blitzkrieg offers you the same late war equipment (with some new stuff on top), a variety of maps, and the latest engine improvements built in (with the exception of v4 stuff) - for a much lower price. As good as the series is, the big bundle would be over a hundred bucks on an older version brought up to current quality, as opposed to the newest thing. A great game? Certainly! But perhaps for a newer player a gentler price tag for entry would be the way to go. Especially as for the same price you could go for two games! 

    My previous (dry?) humour aside, this is actually my recommendation, as it's exactly what I did. 

     

    I already had Black Sea (modern) and wanted to partake of WW2. Went through the same questions/posts/discussions you are, and ended up with FB (wanted quality over quantity). And  loving it.  And the previous poster keeps kicking my arse in it....  ;)

     

    Edit: of course, unlike the previous posters, I don't actually have BN or its modules, so my opinion is somewhat biased in this case!  ;D

  3. On 2/18/2017 at 7:12 AM, umlaut said:

    You're welcome. I've pretty much retired from modding now, but before that I did do a bit of work on the StuGs. Not sure if I ever finished them, though. I'll check and get back to you.

    Updated:
    My "quick snow" versions of the StuGs are not far from finished, so I'll try to finish them soon. And them upload them.

    Umlaut, I just want to say a HUMUNGOUS THANKYOU for your excellent mod collection: it's indispensible! Thanks dude.

    For those late to the party:

    Umlaut's frackin amazing Mod collection!

     

  4. As above.

     

    - take your time.

    - recon with infantry. Split them into teams, with smaller fire arcs, so they don't simply open fire on anyhing they spot, and get obliterated for their trouble.

    - recon, recon, recon.... Repeat that. And then say it again..

    - keep your recon in cover. Slow / crawl them into their final observation position to minimise the chance of them being spotted. possibly even hide them in poor cover (I'm sure someone will disagree with this...) Use lots of recon teams each with limited/narrow line of sight, but ensuring the sum of their coverage gives you a good battlefield picture. A recon team on a hilltop that can see the whole battlefield, can likely be seen by the whole battlefield... and will be quickly  deaded by the whole battlefield...

    - take your time to get a solid battlefield picture before commencing your assault. Just cause you've spotted a solitary T-90 doesn't  mean you need to kill it right away. Find the rest of its troop, and likely its accompanying mech infantry first.

    - in BS generally he who is seen is  VERY quickly dead. Do the seeing, and organise your mech/armour based on that overall battlefield intel in order to shoot first.

  5. On 2/9/2017 at 7:36 AM, Ch53dVet said:

    I don't know if this is true or not but after I've placed an automatic hull down command the tank will always by-pass any partial hull down locations and keep going to the placement point in-hopes of finding a 100% hull down location, even if there wasn't any to begin with, leading me straight to the murder hole I was try to avoid.

    It would be nice if when drawing a hull down command line you'd get pop ups along the line (where the line intersects the rising ground, similar to using the target command as a los indicator) referring you to the % type of hull down it is at that point along the length of the line to its placement marker, also, if there aren't any hull down locations along the path you wouldn't be allowed to place a suicide marker.

    Have you actually drawn a target command from the Hull-Down end-point to a target of interest?

     

    You may have, but your post sounds like you've simply placed a Hull-Down move point with nothing else.

  6. Aye, @robertiv if you haven't tried any of them at all, grab all the demos, and see which theater  grabs your attention (modern (BS)  vs WW2 to start.

    If its WW2, you are so spoilt for choice!:

    • BN plus modules is likely the best value for money. A fair bit of bocage fighting involved (but not limited to this)
    • Many players regard FI + modules to be the most different/interesting, because its not in your normal green/lush Western European landscape (instead, dry mountainous open Italian terrain), and has lots of odd vehicles and stuff
    • RT is the place if you lust after massive infantry and tank battles on the eastern front, with bodycounts to boot...
    • FB is the newest, with lots of bells and whistles, which will gradually percolate back through the other titles. But obviously has no modules as yet.

    [Note that the above is my high level summary from reading these forums and playing all the demos, and may include oversights: I only have FB and BS, and am very happy! I'm a quality over quantity guy (with limited gaming time)!] Personally BS keeps me very happy, but thats cos I suck at WW2... ss a new Youtube AAR against Usually Hapless shows..    ;D

     

     

     

  7. Thanks @luigim & @Wickybut you miss the point. These aren't necessarily requests or wants, but rather things that's are simply unlikely to see the light of day, for various reasons (including as you say, rarity, scale or BF simply saying no).

     

    I guess my point is, we get so immersed in the simulation, that after while you almost forget certain un-modelled real-world factors/dynamics.

     

    Changeable weather I can eventually see happening.

     

     

     

     

  8. Distracting myself from a large defensive setup against @Artemis258, and was pondering the gameplay/environmental items that will be unlikely to ever appear in a CM simulation, due to scale, potential for abuse, etc.

    • Civilians
    • Melee/knife combat
    • Biological/chemical/tactical nuclear weapons
    • Building/grass/forest fires
    • Air-to-air warfare (?)

     

    What other potentially combat-influencing things are not implemented, and likely never will?

     

     

  9. 5 hours ago, exsonic01 said:

    As far as I know, to maximize the BMP's detection ability in CMBS, 1 or 2 soldiers should be inside the BMP and work as a commander role. Is this right? Do you always put 1~2 ppl inside the BMP?

    This is pretty much what I've started doing.

     

    Though I have noticed that even with the Commander's station crewed, it takes a minute or two for the info the 'Commander' sees to be seen by the gunner, which is odd.

×
×
  • Create New...