se_poika

Ok, did some very basic preliminary tests. Mostly seeing what can be done without hex editing. Did some texture swapping and used some masks to get the results I was looking for. These aren't perfect just proof of concept/dipping my toes. This won't be as good as my old civil war and mixed combatant mods but it'll do. With the Syrian Reserves being 98% free of shared textures a very decent Civil War mod and scenarios can be produced. Best results as I see it would be Syrian Reserves (Infantry and Mech), Combatants and Fighters against Syrian Mech, Guards, Airborne and Spec Ops. The Reserves have a pretty decent selection of tanks (and access to most AFV/IFVs) so it would be a decent match up.
Here's some alpha pics to get your imagination pumping.
 

 

NOTE: Combatants are not mixed in with Syrian Reserves.

 

 

 
Mord.

*Takes Bow*
 
I am "Brian" in this particular episode.   I "star" in three others from this season.   Speak to my agent for interviews.   :)
Full disclosure, I am not a veteran of Iraq II.  My time was before 2003/2004.  

So, I guess they could post something along the lines of "There has been some unforeseen problems with the game's development so we missed our estimated ship date.These problems also affect the demo. We are currently unsure when the game/demo will be ready". Would that really enlighten you more than your powers of observation?

Its not  coming out in September.

If you want the official, top level word on how the US sees various countries, regions, organizations and NGOs, tech, economics, etc., in terms of being threats  to US, regional and global security, then here is the UNCLASSIFIED  answer--straight from the DNI (Director of National Intelligence) in February 2018. Ought to provide lots of interesting gaming and game design possibilities. As things stand, would say this relates to CMBS and CMSF (soon CMSF2). But our clever scenario writers, map makers and mod creators can do all sorts of magic, too, using them as kits from which to make their own creations.
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Testimonies/2018-ATA---Unclassified-SSCI.pdf

Regards,
John Kettler

Blackmoria's answer, unsurprisingly, is the one to pay attention to.

Some more points and an illustration:

Mortar vs. Howitzer vs. Field Gun - the interesting thing is where they overlap.

The main practical difference, in all CM games, is how organic each asset is. In WW2 titles, US infantry have 60mm mortars at the Platoon level - this means they are available for the platoon leader to call down, and that they are going to be quick to respond to changing circumstances. 81mm mortars exist at the Company level, and most formations attach their artillery at higher levels than that, and often these larger assets are only available to Forward Observers. 

In CMBS (and to a less extent CMSF, but we'll have to see exactly how this is modelled in CMSF 2) , the modern US infantry rifle platoon can have embedded Forward Observers, and may also have access to small drones. The rifle company also typically has 120mm mortars, which are gettng to the point where they're no longer really "miniature artillery", since they can do some real damage. It's also notable that the US 155mm and 120mm mortars both have a limited amount of precision-guided rounds, which allow you to call in "precision" missions. In the modern titles, Forward Observers often have dedicated vehicles, which cut down their response time even further.

As a ex-artillery officer, here are the principal differences between the types of platforms.
Mortars are high angle only and are incapable of direct fire.  Given an equal caliber, a mortar will have a higher rate of fire than a howitzer or a field gun.  Mortars (except for the very largest) can be broken down and man packed or carried by improvised transport (like the bed of a pickup truck).  For getting directly behind tall intervening terrain with fire, they are a preferred weapon.  Most effective against infantry, limited effectiveness against vehicles, emplacements and buildings.   Lethality inceases with caliber but portabillity/mobility decreases.
Howitzers are capable of direct fire, indirect fire and high angle fire.  They are either towed or self propelled.  Can get really big calibers.  Very effective against infantry, limited against vehicles and emplacements.  Preferred weapon of choice of you don't have airpower and want to level a position, a building or structure.  Biggest variety of ammuntion type - illumination, Smoke - Base Ejecting, Smoke - WP, Cannister (anti-infantry direct fire),HE, ICM, DPICM,  and smart munitions and variable time and time fused ammunition.
Field Guns are direct fire weapons and in a pinch, can do low angle indirect fire, limiting their range and usefulness.  A anti-tank gun is a example of a specialized field gun, for example.  Can get to big calibers like howitzers and are either towed or self propelled.  Not a lot of field guns are made anymore due to their limitations as tanks have largely taken over the roles the field guns used to provide.
In general, the larger the caliber, the bigger the lethal zone.  The larger the round, the smaller the CEP (Circular Error Probable) footprint - a fancy way of saying that if you want to hit a point target, you get the biggest caliber you can get as the round is more stable in the air and less affect by meterological and has a smaller CEP footprint.
The larger the caliber, the more destructive it is to vehicles and structures and emplacements.  Bigger is better.
Call or response times are not weapon dependent.  They are determined by the communications capability and doctrines of the C3 systems used by the army in question.  Lighter weapons like small mortars can be set up quickly and torn down quickly but once emplaced, once a call for fire goes out, it is the C3 systems, crew training and observer training that determine how fast you see a round on the ground.
Combat Mission games try to simulate artillery systems and capability.  Why does it take longer to get a 155mm round on the ground verses a 80mm mortar round base on what I stated above?   The delay is to simulate the fact that mortars are closer to the enemy than howitzer systems and to reflect time of flight realities.  For example,  most of the time, a mortar 1 km from the enemy will tend to have a round on the ground sooner than a 155mm howtizer shooting from 7 km away. And the chain of command / communication issues are simulated as well.  A US 155mm is not inherently faster than a Soviet built 152mm yet in game, the US player will get fire for effect well before the Syrian player will.  This is doctrine and C3I being simulated in game.  So the bigger delay in response time is coded into the game to 'simulate' that.
Hope that answers your questions.

I agree completely. The developers have developed some bad habits concerning marketing and support of their games, and these habits continue to go unchallanged by the community, thus ensuring the continuation of said bad habbits. If their product sucked I obviously wouldn't care one bit, but since the product is pretty excellent this constant lack of communication and broken promises and deadlines (in regards to the patch) is getting on my nerves. 

When a US halftrack is unbuttoned (manning the gun), it will stay unbuttoned even if the crew and passengers are in the "panic" state. And the player is unable to order the halftrack to button. So the vehicle will keep driving around randomly, and the passengers will keep getting shot one by one as they pop up to man the gun. This is not the behaviour of panicked people, but of very brave or fanatic troops.
Panicked guys should stop manning the gun, and try to hide at the bottom of the halftrack. If rounds start to penetrate, they should bail out and run away.
I know there have been cases of very brave troops who kept manning the guns even though they were under heavy fire. However, I'd argue they were not panicking, but merely rattled or shaken in CM terms.
Thanks for your attention. You're now welcome to tell me I'm all wrong

Some simple solid beta YouTube clips basicly equals self marketing... Google cmsf-2. Not a whole lot out There.
i mean i understand its a really small dev team. But Some YouTube clips showing Some features or beta AAR sure wouldnt hurt Sales if your ask me..

quality of the contractor and construction company?
 

I've posted Combat Mission on Pornhub. No one can stop me.

Dead Cells, Terraria, Undertale, Unturned, Stardew Valley, Stanley Parable, Player Unknowns Battle Grounds (Which is pretty crap but successful nonetheless), Momodora: Reverie Under the Moonlight, Insurgency, Guns of Icarus (Pretty old now with a dwindling playerbase but it was great back in the day), Don't Starve, FTL: Faster then light, Door Kickers, Cold Waters, Atlantic Fleet, Mount and Blade Series.
All of those games are just from my Steam, and I do think countless is a good word for what I was talking about. All of these games were extremely popular due to the exposure/availability they have on Steam, if you asked them what the primary cause of there success was it would probably be that there game was fun to play in the first place and Steam allowed them to promote/sell it. Especially games like Cold Waters which is a niche submarine combat game benefited from the exposure it got on Steam, people who have never played sub games gave it a shot and liked it and it was financially beneficial to the guys who made it. You can tell because they released free updated for a year and an entire new campaign in the South China Sea with new units and the like.
I'm well aware there's plenty of crap on Steam and they do a god awful job of managing all of it but the fact of the matter is that Steam helps way more then it hurts in a lot of cases. The phobia of Steam on this website is frankly hilarious and the world zips on by as all of you laugh into the wind at a service that millions of people benefit from and enjoy.
We're way off topic now, I hope the OP actually got what he wanted from this thread even after it was derailed right off the bat by a useless, toxic comment.

I told the same thing to the CEO of Walmart the other day. He's just a parasite between me and my cheap Chinese goods. My new furnace was just installed by a parasite between me and the manufacturer. Services have no value after all.
 
 
Seriously though, that's one hell of a knee-jerk reaction to a question you clearly misunderstood. 
 
 

I don't mind that things are delayed, I mind that the customer base is often left in the dark, often for months on end.
This has admittedly gotten much better in the last few weeks, but it has been months of waiting for the 4.0 patch.
 
I can't say for sure how this is effecting the player base but look at how posting has died off for CMFI and CMRT -  titles I personally really enjoy. There are threads detailing bugs and TOE/OOB errors and omissions from 2014 that have still not been commented on. Are they being fixed in the next patch? Who knows?
If BF is aware that for example FJ gun transports in CMFI carry 50mm ammo regardless of the gun in the platoon, and it's being fixed in the next patch, then that's something I don't have to worry about, if they let the customers know and then I don't have to resurrect dead threads from 2014 in the hopes that it will be noticed, only for there to be no response because nobody is posting in the CMRT forum, lest of all devs.
 
In my opinion, it's not the big things like delays with the website or CMSF2 being a little later than expected, and certainly not major additions like France and Italy being added to CMSF2 at launch, it's the lack of patches and dev blogs on the existing titles. Little things like the graphics issues with the BMP-2M in CMBS, generated many, many community posts and were met with silence. Would it be so much to say "We're aware of that, we're fixing it, it will be in the upcoming patch for the 4.0 engine".
The responses to the question about CMBS bugs persisting into CMSF2 and asking if they will be addressed in a patch for CMBS is a ray of hope, I can only hope that there is a more organized way of doing that going forward.
Maybe have pinned threads in each of the titles' boards and one day a week (if possible) have someone a dev or beta tester come in and give a little update on what's being done on the title, what the known issues are, maybe even solicit help from the community if there is uncertainty about a TOE or OOB. So on Tuesday say, go into the Development Thread in CMFI and say "You know, we looked at that Italian infantry handbook you guys posted back in 2013 (and was reposted in 2018!) that mentions the squad breaking down into 3 man teams, but we think that was just for running in bounds and the Italian rifle squad was fundamentally a LMG section and a rifle section and couldn't maneuver as smaller elements than that." and then on Friday post on the CMFB board and say "Yeah, we're aware that the availability dates for HVAP for the 76mm gun might be off, we'll address that" (No more specifics needed, 10 seconds to post!). The following Tuesday, if there's less going on in the development of CMFI maybe just check in and say "We didn't really take the time to go back to look at the Italians after the engine updates, since they were in the initial release of CMFI and we couldn't just port over assets from other titles when we added AAA. We'd like to add stationary Breda 20mm guns to give Italians the ability to have AA units, and luckily we already have this modeled in game on the AS. 42. We'll hopefully have time to add this as a small patch to CMFI between CMSF2 shipping and Rome to Victory"
I know people like to say customers ask for too much. I disagree. We're not asking for detailed weekly dev diaries, just some indication of what is being done.
I know people say that posting on the forum takes away from development time. I disagree. Just say something like: "Not only will Module 1 for CMRT bring the timeline to the end of the war and add German formations and equipment, but the Soviets got a second looks too. So now Cavalry Uniforms are a selection as appearance in the unit purchase screen instead of a mod tag. Oh and since we already had Polish voice files from other titles, we're adding the First Polish Army to the Russian side". That took about 30 seconds and covered questions raised in dozens of threads and hundreds of posts dating from 2014.
 
 

As much as I do understand your point of view, I would appreciate to have some information at some point. 
I work in IT and I know how hard it is to keep deadlines. I don't mind waiting. But IMHO it wouldn't hurt to drop some info in advance like "Sorry due to 'reasons' the release must be pushed back or so.
In my experience most people have understanding for that but are angry if the are left blank.
Only my 5cents

With the new site finally up we must take a minute to remember our old friend, the Repository, now relegated to the cold dark vacuum of cyberspace. Maybe not the prettiest of spots on the internet, that old ugly wench did her job in earnest, hosting some of the first and oldest of the new engine mods, maps and scenarios. She was the home to my first real endeavors into the modding arena (as ugly as some of them were) and she was the go-to spot before there was a go-to spot. Even though she was cast aside many a year ago for a prettier, younger Mistress, it was nice knowing she was still around if we needed her. And even though she was old, haggard, and hard to handle, she was there with her many forgotten (un-ported) treasures buried in a confusion of broken links and cyber-subterfuge waiting for a visit and a chat. Alas, she has finally and truly given up her ghost, along with many a mod (and perhaps) scenario that never made it to a shinier shore. So, as a new door opens, an old one closes and I say, fare thee well, sweet, ugly, PIA-to-navigate Repository, I salute thee for a job well done! You are gone but not forgotten...well, maybe a little.
And now a blatant and exploitative manipulation of your emotions...bow your heads and shut your mouths (especially you, Emrys, your Flea Deity commands it!)
 
 
Mord.

In honor of the imminent release of CMSF2, I figured I would get a heads start on the time honored tradition of complaining about every new release by making it into a fun game!
I give you, CMSF2 BINGO!

All in good fun of course.

This is great to hear.
I think you could maybe even include some of your Ukranian mods in Shock Force 2. The Marines have been working a lot with the Ukrainians recently (hopefully the Ukrainians were teaching them how to properly deal with Russian forces 😁), so maybe you could even represent Ukrainian mercenaries or advisers? I think it was @IICptMillerII or @Sulomon who mentioned how he'd love to see the Azov Regiment fight the Republican Guard!

I am disappointed by the fact that the biggest thread on the CMSF2 forum is named "disappointed"

I was installing Combat Mission Afghanistan when I recognized that the background picture of a Soviet soldier nearly being hit by a round in the installation menu looked very similar to another picture that I had seen of a U.S. Marine in Afghanistan. I did a little digging and managed to find the picture.
 
Here are the two pictures side-by-side for reference.
 
I originally saw the picture in a reddit thread about a year ago. Apparently the picture is of U.S. Marine Sergeant William Bee while he was taking fire from the Taliban in 2008. I thought it was somewhat fitting that the art for this game of a Soviet taking fire in Afghanistan was based on a U.S. Marine taking fire in Afghanistan decades later.

+1
"First of all because the vast bulk of the Steam customer base hates games like ours, which means the bulk of what Steam has to offer us (tons of customers) has zero practical value to us." - Steve
I'm not a hardcore Steam fan, and I don't really care if they go on Steam or not. But I thought I'd take a look at the numbers.
Steve might be right that the vast bulk of Steam users hate Combat Mission, who knows? But even then, Steam now has 18,5 million users.
If just one in a hundred of those users has the intelligence and interest in realistic WW2 games required to be a match for Combat Mission, that's 185,000 potential customers. If just half of those actually purchase one game, that's 92,500 customers times 60 dollars = $5,550,000 (before Steam cut).
I don't know if that amount of money would be peanuts for a game development company the size of BattleFront.
And of course, I'm not saying Steve can't use a pocket calculator. He obviously has his reasons for doing what he does. I'd just like to challenge the "zero practical value" part of the argument.

Brave Rinaldi, Miller and others have long battled against those who think the lack of communication and fixes is acceptable!  Fortunately many others have come to their aid as more forum posters grow restless after months and months of nothing.
I didn't put anyone specific for the orcs but they represent the people who think the current situation is reasonable (of course they can believe what they wish but in this video they're shown to be wrong) and in general represent steve's lack of communication and fixes.

Not sure what you are asking. You can simulate anything you want.  Think they should have issues with ammo supply? Cut their ammo.  Think they should under perform?  Make em green.  It is your sandbox.  The Canadian story seems a little hype.  "An Accounting error had them 20 minutes away from running out of 25 mm ammo in one situation in a 15 day battle." And how intense was the combat at the moment and what was the ACTUAL effect and how quickly could it be remediated? 
Don't think the Canadians should have tanks?  Don't use em.  However keep in mind you are comparing a hindsight of Afghanistan to a hypothetical conflict in Syria during which there would have been months to prep.  You can't really draw conclusions as to what the situation should have been based on a different reality.
Frankly if you want to get truly realistic, the Syrian army would be pretty much non functional with no large armor formations.  CMSF is a game designed to be fun with the toys at hand.  It is your choice as to what you think you want to do with it.  Kind of silly to ask if NATO is over equipped and not consider that the Syrian army would likely not exist at all in any organized fashion. 
.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Art