Thewood1

Is that part of the game or are you talking about IRL. Does the TacAI pop smoke and then relocate to a new position?

I think the biggest issue with tank crews is that experience and training levels really should only apply in vehicle. Once out of vehicle, they should become at least green.

I just went through Janes AFV 2004-2005 and 2008-2009. Both show several pictures of the 1A5 with the box on the front. Does that make it absolutely definitive? No. But its close. Its the exact time period of CMSF (2008). There were a total of four pics of the 1A5 and all had the box. None of the 1A3s had them. I have a couple more references I'll check. btw, I have no issues with it. Its so minor I'm surprised it even got a mention. edit: Just confirmed that Tankograd's 2007 book on the Marder also shows at least a dozen pics with the glacis-mounted stowage box. In fact, in the description of the 1A5, they use that box and one on the back hull as the main recognizable external differences between the A3 and A5. btw, it always kinda shocks me only about 4% of the Marders were ever upgraded to 1A5.

Is there something keeping you from elaborating on that? Other than just stirring things up.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Is it because the AI doesn't think the AP rounds will penetrate? It seems like they should penetrate, but just wondering.

Yeah, I tend to agree with not being able to document every little nook and cranny of info. But this one was obscure enough that mentioning it in the write up in the manual would and will eventually save some frustration. It took me a long time to find that excerpt and that was only because I have access to search tools an average gamer doesn't have access to. I think all highly complex games should have a moderated FAQ section that has these little pieces of critical info deposited in them. Its also a good repository for devs to look at what info their customers find necessary to play the game. That's why it should be moderated or even locked.

A more detailed technical description of the beacon issue is here: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/23-34/Ch1.htm "(f) Thermal beacon. Under some battlefield conditions such as heavy smoke, dust, or fog, the xenon beacon, which operates on the lower end of the infrared spectrum, cannot penetrate the obscuration. With the TOW missile and weapon system it is sometimes possible for the gunner to be able to acquire the target, yet the infrared receiver on the daysight tracker cannot acquire the infrared beacon and the system loses the missile. TOW 2-series missiles have a thermal beacon to correct this deficiency. The thermal beacon operates on the upper end of the infrared spectrum and will penetrate any obscurant the nightsight can see through. A postamplifier was added to the AN/TAS-4A nightsight on the TOW 2 weapon system to acquire the thermal beacon and track it in much the same manner as the infrared beacon. The basic AN/TAS-4 is a passive sight, but the AN/TAS-4A is an active sight with the ability to steer the missile to any target that the gunner can see through the sight itself."

The flare visibility on early TOW and M47 tracking units is a fairly critical piece of info to have. I have never played a game with either in this time period and never even considered that. Most of my Cold War gaming experience is mid- to late-80s. Publicizing it more will sure save a lot of people some frustration.

And we always come back to this. The game is built for people who have been playing CM games for 20 years and scour the forums for every tidbit of information. It has been requested ad nauseum to have a FAQ section where little pieces of info can be collected. It would seem to be a common sense approach if its too resource intensive to keep updating a manual.

That Warrior upgrade has been cancelled. And I don't think those turrets are very close to similar.

3Gb for a patch is kinda big.

That's assuming Apple doesn't do something stupid.

In Steel Beasts, and these guys are current and former tankers, the default is a 90 deg constant scan with 45 deg to each side of the point that the TC sets. It can be widened and narrowed by order and SOP. In fact, there are have been arguments from noobs about not having the constant scan. But the experts all insisted that is an absolute part of maintaining situational awareness. It should also be noted that more and more tech is being added to tanks to keep the TC buttoned...field phones, RWS, ITIS, etc.

It should be pointed out that almost every 3D game I play has the LOD issue. In some its more apparent than others. Steel Beasts has it, but at the highest settings it almost goes away. But at the highest settings, my old 1660 struggled. MS Flight Simulator has raging arguments on its forums about tree and building LODs in multiple ongoing threads. But some of the 3D games I play, while still having a few LOD issues, have found creative ways to hide it. Back when CMSF was being worked on, there were discussions about BFC's choice of sticking with older OpenGL graphics libraries. It was predicted by more than a few that these graphical and performance issues would eventually manifest themselves. And they have. But the issue is not unique to CM games. Its just starker because of the graphical engine choice and that way the game was developed. At one time, I used to dwell on it. But at this point, I would rather BFC spend their time finally getting modules out for some of the orphaned games.

I think people also forget that MBTs aren't the only enemy AFV on the battlefield. The Dragon is pretty handy for getting after BMPs.

The downside of Steel Beasts is the amount of time you spend planning your game/battle out. I spend twice as long giving orders, setting waypoints, and setting SOPs as I do in actually executing the battle. In SB, even though it executes at the individual vehicle and team level, you always need to be thinking about flanks, reserves, fuel, and ammo. As a company or battalion commander in SB you have to do all that planning because when the game starts, you have to have given proper orders or you'll run out of cycles to make decisions. In CM, I generally give a look at the map, plan a general strategy in my head. Then execute the plan five minutes at a time. I look at every unit and contact to make sure to set the orders after a turn runs. I end up being the brains of almost every unit in an attack.

Everything in SB is based off the waypoint. In fact, the units static position, or battle position, is really the same as a waypoint. You can combine all the same commands. The unique part is the battle position is not a hard static point. Based on the SOPs assigned to it's battle position, a unit is allowed to range a certain distance from the position to engage, hide, seek cover, move to a new position, call arty, etc. There is also a logic engine that allows you to branch to a new waypoint or position based on enemy, casualties, time, or player orders. I would love to have seen BFC take the order chains to one more level of SOPS and a simple logic engine at each waypoint.

When CMSF first came out, Steve was fairly clear that they were pushing CM2 to be a real-time game. CMSF 1.0 was really a real-time game with automatic pauses every 60 seconds. A number of us complained about the lack of the old hunt command, scoot & shoot, and hull down. Eventually hull down got put back in. The current hunt command is really the old "move to contact" command. The old hunt command allowed a unit to stop and fire at a detected enemy, then continue on to its next waypoint without intervention. That old hunt command was the equivalent of "fire on the halt". CM2, right now, has no "fire on the halt" capability. Tanks are always moving and firing. With all that said, the ability to chain commands together that eventually culminated with the current system after a few years, is far superior to CM1. And similar to Tacops, Steel Beasts has combinations of movement commands, formations, and tactics to create SOPs that dictate reaction to enemy contact. They range from stop and reverse, to fire a shot then reverse, to assault. And like Tacops, you can tell the unit to execute tasks , like unload passengers, fire at a spot, breach a minefield, etc. These can all be chained together. Even the default "TacAI" knows to look for cover after firing or seek another hull down position.

And that's exactly what it should be doing. The perspective I have on the M47 is it does what its designed to do. It replaces some very outdated missiles and recoilless guns. That's all the 1960's and early 1970's infantry teams had. It was meant to counter IFVs and make T-55s and T-62s evaluate infantry threats.

The thermal image for the operator was relatively low resolution and red on black. Not the green on black most people associate with thermal imaging. Its interesting watching it fly in Steel Beasts. It has the popping sound, is inaccurate, and has a hard time doing more than damaging and pissing off a T-62.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2A28_Grom

Thanks for posting that. I used the settings on my 2080 and it helped a lot. I have struggled with getting more and more powerful laptops with CM performance degrading as each got more advanced. This is the first time I have seen any improvement.

Its in the manual...page 59.

Never had a file that winrar can't open. And its free. Its the OG of compression. You do have to keep it updated.