Rinaldi
-
Posts
1,186 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Posts posted by Rinaldi
-
-
On 2/28/2019 at 3:53 PM, Sequoia said:
Awesome. Is that your mod?
If this is directed at me: Thanks, I run 0 mods on my Shock Force and Black Sea installs currently.
The images are just from a text AAR of Halt Hammerzeit I've been slowly working on, as I haven't the time or software presently to cut a video.
-
-
Oh goodness, George, I went and mixed them up...which I suppose illustrates the point about confusing nomenclature, as well as how daft I am.
-
6 hours ago, George MC said:
As an aside, I've not noticed badly wounded or KIA crew members be replaced in damaged vehicles no matter what % 'refit' set to. You any take on that?
No sadly, nothing more than speculation; I wonder if that's because they count the actual crewman as 'infantry' - which would therefore fall under 'refit' rather than attached to the vehicle - which would fall under repair. Possible oversight. Easily fixed I suppose by a campaign designer being merciful and just slamming 100/100 on both values at a certain point.
Speaking of which, nitpicky but some errata to my previous post: Last mission of TF 3-69 actually only gives the US a 25 percent chance to refit.
-
49 minutes ago, George MC said:
My <understanding> is the following:
Refit - this refers to replacement men and equipment including vehicles.
Repair Vehicle - refers to repairing vehicles NOTE: repairs are binary i.e. fully repaired vehicle rather partially repaired vehicle
Resupply - all units are equipped with ammo (NOTE: fuel load outs not tracked in CM)
Rest - how much units get to recover.
The actual % is set by the designer and TBH I've not tested them. I've tended to go 'feel' through a campaign via testing and what I think is a 'realistic' value e.g. if campaign covers consecutive days then I'd tend to set the first two to 0 and most everything to a very low %. It's binary so refit set to a high % will mean everything gets refitted to that % how the game engine works this out I've no idea. As i said I just set what i think is realistic and then check that behavior produces the required results in game.
You have the measure of it. Refit would replace a knocked out or destroyed vehicle, whereas a repair would say, bring back to the TO&E a fallen-out vehicle (say if it was immobilized) or put all its subsystems back to status green.
I used Ian's website to finally figure it out by looking at the scripted values for the Black Sea campaigns. For example, you have a 50/50 chance of refit before the final US mission. I struck out and therefore had to make due with a heavily worn-out Scout platoon. The confusion comes for a lot of people, understandably, because 'refitting' a vehicle is often used interchangeably with 'repairing' one. Whereas in the context of CM it means 'refitting the unit' versus 'repairing the vehicle.'
-
4 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
It's strange you say that fella, because it's pretty plain to see that my alleged 'bait' is the only post in this entire thread that actually relates directly to the CM games.
Broken clocks.
-
Everyone, let's take a moment to give @Sgt.Squarehead a slow clap for his fantastic bait. We already have a nationalist spaz-out in response.
Telemark Battalion DUI:
2.SS Das Reich DUI:
Really makes you think friendo. Going to be a Y I K E S from me.
-
They're using SS runes and the idiots who follow them use dirt-ass Neo Nazi rock to celebrate them, the only cover they deserve is how they're giving the bots who slurp up Russian propaganda an inch to turn into a mile.
-
34 minutes ago, John Kettler said:
Have no idea what's being said in the music
Far right trite, not worth your or anyone else's time.
-
8 minutes ago, sburke said:
You really feel the need to tell other folks what they should or should not want in the game?
Don't kill my dreams.
Samarra Iraq 2008
Only when it's asinine. Yes, a m113 in an insurgency - definitely a front-line unit for a conventional, fictional conflict.
-
Putting the Dragon in would finally silence those who believe @Battlefront.com is a NATO stooge; finally a BLUE ATGM with an equally hilarious failure rate of the average RED one.
-
Glad you know :^), just pointing out that it's all the more reason not to see it in.
-
-
29 minutes ago, Sublime said:
Im a usual bot? Listen 'friend' Im not a bot. 2nd I find it a bit rich for you to call me a bot whem Ive been posting here since 1999.
We act snarky esoecially to new members at our own peril. BFC needs more customers not ppl being driven off by jerk answers to questions. RTFM used to be an answer but people still courteously would explain as well. Frankly I worry sending people here sometimes when I never used to because some of this board has gotten so elitist/rude to people.
lmao, I'll pray for you homie
-
Another thread sent off the rails and burning at the bottom of the valley by our favourite bots. It's good to have consistency in life, it's an anchor.
-
1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
Definitely another must for a CM:BS Vehicle Pack.
Might not have to wait that long. I imagine the hinted-at Marine module will mirror SF2's in adding additional formations for the other armies. I'd place money on seeing Air Assault regiments for the Russians and Ukrainians in that.
-
10 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
I think it should be possible to eyeball a situation and get a pretty good result.
It already is.
-
On 1/31/2019 at 3:18 AM, Michael Emrys said:
I read it and found it to be absolutely demented. It was completely unrealistic from beginning to end, said end obviously being the preconceived endpoint that the author intended to arrive at with no regard for the means of getting there. War porn of the trashiest sort.
Michael
Really disappointed to read that, I really liked Red Storm Rising, though yes of course like most WWIII alternatives it is always 'best case' for one side or the other. A similar criticism can be shared with Red Army, which I equally loved. The only real 'breaks' from reality as the authors knew at the time in both books is (a) the total denuclearization/dechemicallization of the battlefield and (b) the aggressive stance the Soviet Navy took.
Each his own of course. From a purely literal perspective, Red Army is just a better book, with actual character development and depth.
Anyways, as for the actual hypothetical @kinophile I'm going to be revealing my power levels here, but I always figured the following:
- Tensions remain high because the UKR has enclaves in the separatist regions, so it would be plausible that all belligerents have forces 'near ready' on the border with one another. When the balloon goes up following the 'Ambush' incident, things deteriorate rapidly as a result.
- By early July the first ABCT units are arriving - based on @George MC's standalone scenarios and the TF 3-69 campaign, the timeline goes in two ways: The Russian spearheads are either cut off and defeated in detail along E-95 (Attacking N-S) and P-32 (Attacking E-W), which are roughly perpendicular to one another and form an obvious pocket; or
- The Russians manage to maintain their momentum on the South-North axes and defeat and destroy the NATO counter-offensives.
- August scenario diverges in a similar manner: If NATO win in July, they 'race to the river' to defeat remaining Russian forces across the Dnieper and push into the southeast, if Russia win they mop up south of Kiev and start banging on the bargaining table.
I think the 'keep it simple' scenario was done deliberately, best not to overthink it beyond the above in my view. It also suggests why the game plays out the way it does, its bang-bang from the word 'go' without all the strategic preponderance everyone else is worrying about. It's a true flashpoint conflict in every sense of the word. Compelling stuff, really, hats off to Battlefront for it.
-
-
4 minutes ago, sid_burn said:
Do you still plan on doing John Kettler Investigates? I need to ask, straight up, who killed JFK? @IICptMillerII and I have a bet going.
Yikes. Imagining asking him that when you can ask him the much more burning question: Who killed Vince Foster?
-
1 hour ago, John Kettler said:
Would add that, though I know squat about how the Canadian Army operates, I found tactics, procedures, capabilities depicted and pretty much everything else to be entire credible. In fact, I'd say it's about as close to real combat as I ever wish to be. A
lmao
-
On 1/26/2019 at 5:26 AM, IanL said:
Whatever they care to create
This, obviously. Though if I was actually able to have a single modicum of influence on what they release next: battlepacks for Black Sea. The team has a well-thought out strategic and operational chain of events for the game that are itching to be fleshed out.
In fact, I think focusing on smaller, shorter releases would benefit every title after the next spate of modules. As much as everyone is looking forward to the end-war modules and the hinted-at formation expansions in Black Sea, I'd like to see the singleplayer experience built up some more with the type of small, 3-6 mission campaigns we've seen recently.
-
Love it, can't wait to replay it in the new engine. Congrats George.
-
Jesus....mate, I can give it a go in French and Italian if that'll help some.
Bug: Game does not end.
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Only the AI will automatically surrender; hot-seats are multiplayer and said games between 'two' humans will only end when a ceasefire is agreed on, surrender is issued or time has run out.