Muzzleflash1990

Are we talking Rolling Thunder? I had the same problem. Tried UAVs several times during that scenario, both with large observe circles, but also small right on top. Then AH-64s. Then futile attempts with infantry getting to within ~350-400m I recall. Nothing would give me the spot. I've also tried bradleys and abrams in concealed hull down positions, but those that didn't get the laser warning from that team, didn't see anything either. Finally, late in the scenario I had set the necessary conditions elsewhere, such that I could pound this position with artillery, and advance in direct confrontation.

I'm not involved in the game-kind of programming, but the blurred terrain in CM is one of the few, supposedly technical limitations, I do not understand. Take a terrain 4km x 4km. Thats 500 tiles x 500 tiles = 250.000 tiles. That is 500.000 triangles that have to be rendered and textured. I believe current graphics hardware process triangles in the severals millions per second. Sure comparing triangles is not a good measure, there also other 3d models, lighting, water and smoke effects particularly trees and so on to render, but it still seems like very little. Even if you need to use lower quality textures - didn't mipmapping solve this problem satisfactorily at least a decade (or two) ago?

Before the release of the game I gave this matter quite a bit of thought, thinking that if 1 minute is used for WW2, then surely the pace of modern combat demands shorter turn times (boyd cycle and what not). Playing the game after release I have not found it be that much of an issue that I though. When i've needed a 'timeout', it has most often been because my infantry got caught in ambush in MOUT, and without intervention the team would not survive. Don't know whether it is possible to mod the game to allow such a thing. I doubt you can go much longer than a minute; seem to recall that the sizes of turns was the reason there is no TCP WEGO. The other question is would we want to? Given your example with your recon spotting an enemy vehicle, and you want your tank to engage it. From a competitive multiplayer perspective I can see the point in wanting to exploit any opportunity to hurt your opponent. From a realism perspective, is it likely the the recon unit would be able to communicate the position of the enemy vehicle up the chain of command (or unto some digital map), and then down again in 45s to the tank commander, which then immediately finds and decides which position to move to in order to engage?

The patch log only mentions humvee's will have their ammo changed: Not sure what the Stryker uses, it was listed only as AP-I. Googling around I found a source which mentioned that M8 API (don't know it that is the right one) has 16mm at 500, and 8mm 1000.

In that case, since I see no change to BMP armour and just need to know to make my mind at ease, is the front armour supposed to be this weak: video ? Sometimes 50.cal hits ammo or something and cause Major Destruction. I ask because it is supposedly protected against 30mm AP at a range of 300m. Even if that is sales crap, is it really that vulnerable to 50.cal at 80m? I mean a couple of shots hitting somewhere weak I can understand, but seems like a lot in this video.

My guess is you also have to make sure your opponent patches "on the same turn".

Very interesting idea. Will allow all to share their ideas and learn new tricks from each other. Unlike what I unintentionally did, I recommend you don't play the entire scenario with trees turned off; don't even know what difficulty level that is .

I see this often. Say my tank moves forward and spots a target to its right. It will turn its gun to face the target. Then my tank hits some waypoints forming a turn and the vehicle itself begins to turn. Say my waypoints formed a right turn, now the the tank is turning right and the gun remains fixed, meaning it is now aiming too much to the right. It is only when the tank resumes straight driving or stops, that the gun begins to realign. Said simpler, the guns orientation remains fixed relative to the hull during any turn. This is often more noticable during "panic reversals" where the tank feels overmatched and turns, then backs into cover.

The BMP-3 is beginning to seem like a really poorly designed weapon system. I mean why would they not have permanent vehicle commander if the gunner's spotting ability is so poor? I could understand if it only had a 50. cal or less, or maybe even a 40mm; but all that munition and then lacking the ability to spot targets. When mounted by its infantry squad the bow gunners spot better (yes they really do. Infantry hiding in forests).

Very interesting. Would this explains the disheartening issues I've had with my BMP-3s? Namely, them consistently losing against stykers frontally in 1-on-1 (and even a bleeping hummer) due to the 50. caliber causing frontal penetration which I believe it is protected against (and then a bit). One even blew up! - which I would normally consider extremely lucky, but not since all my other BMP-3s died to frontal 50. caliber fire - though not as violently. Are they also looking into why 7.62 penetrates the rear of BMP2/3? Something I believe they are just, if only barely, protected against.

Maybe it is related to the other issues people have had with weird penetrations (after v1.01 release): http://community.battlefront.com/topic/118262-a-question-about-the-t-90%E2%80%98s-armor-protection-was-found%EF%BC%81/ .

On a related note on small arms, I've had a BMP-3 penetrated and knoced out in the rear by small arms fire. The squad that did this had 2 AK's and 1 PKM. The BMP-3 is supposedly armoured for all-around small arms fire protection. I would think that covers 7.62 also. The range was around 100m.

I had this happen too in that mission, and don't think they were in 'extremis'. But it has been the only time so far, so I guess it was one of the rare occurrences where they do. Here is a replay of it, in case something is off: http://bit.ly/1DhLSGa.

I had much fun in this mission. And also this (maybe spoiler?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIUm4vet6gc .

Don't worry, I will cover for you; I will stay up 50 hours after it gets out.

Watching the action down at ground level, and then unintentionally pinpointing unseen enemy positions by sound. Unfortunately it is a tough design choice made by BF. If they keep it you can 'cheat' your way to enemy positions (multiplayer mostly affected?). If they remove it and make the sound source position "global" unless spotted at the time of shooting, I think it will detract a good deal from immersion. Also area firing against the AI, since it doesn't have the capability.

I unknowingly played a mission like that. I was so mad at the game for weird LOS issues. Think I got a major victory though (maybe it was just a tactical), can't remember for sure. The thought that I did play with trees turned off occurred the next day; I looked and the map looked completely different: Oh so those trees are why my troops got slaughted in some magic ambush.

Can you not give them their next order (waypoint) before they are finished? Then, when they are done marking mid-turn, they move on.

I tried it in game and it was more like center of mass, rather than geometric center. For the SU-100 the center was in the middle of the hull (think as if the gun had not been there extending outside the hull.

Noticed in the tutorial of the manual, that you are supposed to send observers to the observation post. You are to give them full circle cover arc to prevent them from firing and revealing themselves to the enemy. I find this very odd practice for observation teams: unit have better spotting ability to their front so I always give them a non-full directional cover arc to get them looking in the right direction, whereas with a full circle cover arc they might end up looking weird direction, unlike vehicles where the line from the last waypoint pretty much guarantee facing. I know it is a tutorial so the reason might be not to overburden new players, but on the odd case it is not; am I missing something?

Somewhat. Planned recon by fire is exempt to me restraining my use of area fire. However, if I am attacked and my unit do not have any idea where the enemy is - that is no contact marker - I almost never order an area fire. Exceptions would be fortifications, or if everybody else around the unit is firing at the enemy, or the enemy is laying out a ton of fire - the logic being "where there is smoke there is fire". If the unit has a dimmed/transparent contact I usually also refrain from area targeting and instead wait for the unit itself to gain a solid direct contact itself. If that does not happen in a couple of minutes I allow myself to give the target order on the contact location. I don't manually simulate messengers between the different headquarters, instead I defer to the games C2 links.

You are right and I am wrong. Just tested it out in RT. I assigned a tank a target arc to its left and two waypoints. On the first waypoint I placed a "clear target" but it had no effect. The tank continued forward looking to its left. Now i'm left with more questions than I started with: How to cancel target arc?

1) It is my understanding that clear target cancels all target orders including fire briefly and target arcs. 2) Which targeting orders cannot be cancelled by clear target?

I agree Vinnart. As a young person (relatively) I think you are right. Amongst me and my friends most gaming is multiplayer and all the multiplayer games played have some form of coop. The implicit 'rule' is that multiplayer is for playing with friends against strangers or AI. I sometimes show them screenshots from my CM playings, and they always express interest. But they know it doesn't have coop and it thus not eligible. Should be noted that the people in my circle has rather few obligations and much free time is spent in front of the computer on TeamSpeak so it is not a fair representative. So I understand the financial reasons that may preclude a coop option. Although I will still like no note that even outside my circle, among the gaming males aged 20-40 I know, there is still the underlying tendency, that you only play coop and not versus against friends -- yes we are a bunch of conflict shy youngsters who only dare play against AI or strangers .