Jump to content

Muzzleflash1990

Members
  • Posts

    205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Muzzleflash1990

  • Birthday 03/28/1990

Converted

  • Location
    Denmark
  • Interests
    Wargaming, Programming, Various varying interests.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Muzzleflash1990's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/3)

47

Reputation

  1. Spoiler Warning: These images are from August Morning, the smallest scenario in Black Sea. So I wanted to setup a SBF position and this place looks suitable. I can't get my camera low enough. But the waypoint LOS seems to be good. I can even see a bit down further into the valley than where the baddies are. After they get there this is what I see Forget about into partial into the valley, I cannot even see the house. And no they are not actually obeying the targeting command. Because they can't. In CM you have to play the squad leader too. Except you can't hand place your MG gunner in the 8x8m action tile. Can you tell if it that location 75 yards away in real life affords visibility to a certain location? Perhaps not. Can you tell if the location 8m next to you do? Most likely. Could you do it slightly before arriving at your current action tile? Well too late in CM, you now have to shuffle tired around until you find the position or move fast and risk the danger. What about the setup phase? Currently you have *no* reliable way to determine if infantry can see a particular place unless they are above ground floor. I am all for lowing the "precision" of the tools in CM. But the "accuracy" playing field needs to be fair. And right now they favor vehicles; not only that, it lies way more to infantry. I can place my camera at vehicle height and easily determine reliable vision from a location 75 yards or for that matter 1000 yards away without touching the Targeting command. If I had the choice to completely remove the LOS part of the targeting tool in exchange for allowing my camera to go prone I would take it. Anyway. Doubt anything is going to change; if anything until engine version 5. And maybe it is my gripe. And it is fair to throw the "realism" card, my only counter will be that in real world you can be a bit more fluid as SL with positioning. And for my poor whataboutism arguments: looking at AAR and DAR it is quite common that people do infact keep pushing waypoints around for tanks several 100m away until they find that perfect keyhole positioning to target that just appeared threat well after the setup phase. A much greater atrocity IMO than trying to ensure an MG can essentially just see somewhat right from its next position. I don't even use area fire unless I have at least a faded contact marker.
  2. I know that LOS and LOF is not the same. But regardless in my game, you cannot lower the camera below the barrel of a tank gun (maybe 10 inches), but that is still very far from the crouching infantry height let alone prone. It is not an uncommon for me to wonder whether infantry will have prone LOS/LOF from A to B when gentle slopes are present on either side. The waypoint LOS check often assumes standing and the camera does not go low enough. Often the only way is to commit to the order and wait and see. I lived with the limitations for since CMBN, but there is room for improvement. And enabling the camera to go even lower is one of the possible solutions that does not require additional user interface commands or features. At worst, there may be certain terrain tiles where the camera might clip into the ground, but that can already be done with vehicles.
  3. It is a known, but rather rare bug. Not sure what is the cause. Once had a theory, that the act of turning the turret itself - due to parallax - cause LOS/LOF to be lost and it reverts, then gaining LOS/LOF again. But this does not seem to describe the issue on long distances.
  4. For one thing, you would need to specify the height yourself of the observer. One of my annoyances with the waypoint+target is that it does not take into account final stance. You can order infantry squad to move to a place, and the on the final waypoint you check they have visibility. Problem is that visibility is checked from standing stance, but when they get their they go prone. I mostly just move the camera around and gauge visibility using my screen. Unfortunately this is not good enough for infantry since the lowest the camera will go is around the height of a typical tank barrel. But for general use this is my preferred way.
  5. You are talking about danger spaces, most specifically the one closest to the target.
  6. If they integrated with Steams networking utilities (or some other 3rd partner) we could get direct connections instead of having to port forward. This would help with the "live" TCP/IP modes. In my country at least, Carrier-Grade NAT is the norm, so no amount of fiddling will get port forwarding working for you. I have to resort to VPNs for TCP/IP.
  7. Steam has a list of authorized retailers you can trust. Also isthereanydeal.com only lists deals from authorized sellers.
  8. About the big deal with Steam. Don't remember if it was CMRT og CMBS, but Battlefront insisted that they were using a major (think it was top 3) CDN to deliver the game files, but it took ages (200KBps and think some people had their download interrupted and had to restart). Then there is the sometimes confusing patching process where you in the past you had to consider engine version too. Few weeks ago I reinstalled CMBS on Steam, the entire process took less than 3 minutes (literally from start of download to being in-game). I did not have to wonder whether I had the latest possible patch because by default you always do on Steam. I did not have to look my license code to activate it since it uses Steam DRM. Steam is certainly not ideal from a philosophical stance point (eg. you don't own the game - however, don't forget until some years ago you had to manually backup the game download from BF also). I plan to buy Cold War from Battlefront website to support them directly and to ensure they get most of the money. However, assuming it is viable, I will activate the game on Steam and play it from there.
  9. I've been messing with QB battles and I noticed the US infantry squads in SF have little ammo compared to BS. I know the ammo caliber is shared among all members, but each infantry soldier contributes to the squad ammo "pool". Of the 9 man US infantry squad, 7 are riflemen, and by comparing with other units, and splits squads, one can easily deduce that each rifleman carries (contributes) 210 rounds for a (sub-)total of 1470 rounds (a minor exception in BS is the one carrying the M110 changing 210 5.56 for 140 7.62). In Shock Force the squad carries 1870 rounds giving a total of 400 rounds for the SAW gunners, or 200 rounds each - only a single 200 round box magazine. In Black Sea the squad carries 3470 rounds giving a total of 2000 rounds for the SAW gunners, or 1000 rounds each. Maybe the load carried in fictional Syria was/should be lower than that of expecting a fight against Russia in eastern Europe, but the Shock force numbers seems sorta ridiculous for the SAW gunner to contribute fewer rounds than the rifleman. Of course you can partially workaround this if you are using the carrier vehicles and acquire, but it is possible to play with only dismounts. Any thoughts?
  10. While I also get the feeling that rifles seems a tad too ineffective vs automatics ingame, it was not the US belief that their rifleman were as precise as consistently hitting at 250 yards in combat. From their ACR program they wanted to improve on the fact they only expected 1 in 10 shots to hit the target at 220meters ~= 250 yards.
  11. Since LMGs are also picked up when buddy aiding, a squad can lose "its gunner" multiple times.
  12. Sure the command & control and morale system is well done in CM. The We-GO is rather unique in for CM compared to others. But I am surprised this feature hasn't been mentioned yet - I consider it to be the most distinguishing feature of tactical combat in CM. In fact, dumb down most other features and keep this one and IMO that will still distinguish CM from the rest. Certainly a feature that some consider a bit rough around the edges - especially when not in full daylight. I am of course talking about relative spotting. Now when I play any other game of you controlling units with ranged firepower something is always amiss. This is just one anecdote but it is the same for all other games: I was playing Armored Brigade and I was defending. I had setup an ATGM for (only) flank shots with excellent concealment and cover in some woods. In fact it could only be spotted when the enemy moved past it. And it got some kills. But that stopped the moment it was spotted. Because like any other game, a unit is either spotted or not. And when my unit was spotted the entire enemy brigade in that sector, all started turning their gun towards the ATGM unit simultaneous in a display of amazing synchronization. Anything that was technically in range and had some >0% chance of hitting turned to fire. Fifty machine guns and some dozen HE shots reduced that ATGM unit in less than 2 seconds. I felt cheated. Not because I lost my ATGM unit, I might have anyway. But in the manner that it happened.
  13. Personally, I think this segments fits better. You can imagine the rest here (the link does not preview because it has start and end times). https://www.youtube.com/embed/O7X1BCCH9a8?start=159&end=192&version=3
×
×
  • Create New...