Oliver_88
-
Posts
196 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Oliver_88
-
-
1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
Worth a check.....I misunderstood the precise scope of your question when I gave my initial answer, so you've got me wondering about it too now.
Nope done about ten more turns now and no change.
This bugs also the reason that you seem to sometimes see tentative icons positions warping about back and forth. Because when no units are selected the viewpoint that your presented with for each tentative icon is the viewpoint for whomever was last informed about those contacts (at least thats what I've been able to discover it's not documented as such). So as each of the many units on your map get informed through C2 your global view of the tentative icon jumps between these incorrect and correct positions.
-
No I did not to be honest. You can tell that the HQ was updated about the contact through C2 during the turn because the icons opacity/transparency changed to indicate the age of the contact. So it was not just that the C2 handshake had not occured yet which is what I presume your wondering? The C2 handshake occurs, the age of the contact updates, just not the position.
But now that I am home I will try few turns further now to be sure.
-
There we go any better, able to see the video now?
-
On 4/20/2019 at 8:31 PM, Oliver_88 said:
Would be interested to know whether the bug that causes the positions of tentative icons to not be updated is resolved or not?
Also, I do not suppose CMSF2 has any acquirable mortars à la CMBN carrier section to know whether the bugs with acquiring those is resolved also does it?
On 4/20/2019 at 8:58 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:I can confirm that tentative icons update in CMSF2, I'm watching some do it right now.....Group #13, your nemesis awaits!
Just got the patch, done some tests. Not resolved from what I can see?
On 5/3/2019 at 10:06 PM, domfluff said:CMBN Carrier platoon bug is fixed
Yeh the issue with the carrier sections acquiring thier mortars from the vehicles been resolved (through changing to the "airborne" variant instead). The carrier sections are going to be lethal now what with that and the resolved Brens.
Same solutions not been done to the anti-tank platoon however and they remain mortar-less. 
-
39 minutes ago, Zveroboy1 said:
I don't understand how TO&E has anything to do with patch 4 issues. I mean I am glad they are trying to fix issues in this area but really all people have been asking for is a fix for infantry under arty fire leaving cover. An issue that was introduced what two years ago? Two years is a long time for a fix. I really feel the TOE should have been tackled separately.
I am not a person then it seems.
Sorting out the issues with tentative icons, mortar acquiring issues, Bren fire rate issues, also yes some TO&E things (purchasing Vickers detachments giving you Headquarter detachments instead, whole formations missing in QB that exist in SD, formations missing their vehicles and so on). Then yeah sure after all that infantry under artillery fire behaviour would be good.
-
4 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
I've got all the CM games (all but CM:BO are still installed and in use too), in my experience CM:SF2 is the least effected by Engine 4 Issues (men scattering under indirect or direct fire).
Yes your men will still sometimes do dumb things, but hey.....Guess what?
36 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:It is fixed. Men will no longer displace out of cover into the open when under artillery/direct fire. I believe @Sgt.Squarehead was referring to the more nuanced tweaks made to infantry behavior that shipped with CMSF2, instead of just the artillery fix.
Would be interested to know whether the bug that causes the positions of tentative icons to not be updated is resolved or not?
Also, I do not suppose CMSF2 has any acquirable mortars à la CMBN carrier section to know whether the bugs with acquiring those is resolved also does it?
-
Thanks for the update.
Anxious to discover what issues in the game have been sorted out.
-
I am now, to be honest, getting tad dispirited and impatient for the patches or news about their progress.
-
9 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:
I've not tested this but the behavior doesn't surprise me. The ammo sharing distance is 16 meters (2 action spots). This distance is determined on the horizontal plane with the vertical probably ignored. So in an extreme case a fire team at the top of a 14 floor building in CMBS could probably share ammo with a fire team (same platoon) outside on the ground and within two action spots of the building. Same for the case you are showing in the screenshot which is easier to believe than my extreme 14 floor example.
This is my experience and understanding also. Same goes for one magazine at a time sharing that occurs between units of the same sub-formation (those that are also highlighted when one unit is selected) when one of them has exhausted that ammunition. For example, take this infantry team on the left being able to use explosive rounds on its Airborne 2inch Mortar because it's been shared them round by round from the mortar team across the road.
8 hours ago, RockinHarry said:hmmmmmmm..... would that not be just the theoretical value for a possible ammo share, when the teams 5 RPG warheads at hand are used up? Any other valid supplier around in share range, like another team in neighboring buidling and such? I´d test using up the 5 WH and see what happens then. Also.. I´m not an RPG expert, so is the 5 WH from the team the same model than shown as beeing PG 7 V HEAT? There´s yet a similar somewhat confusing feature in WW2 titles, where i.E HE rifle grenades are seperated from HEAT ones, by means of the unit data tab UI placement.
maybe some PG 7 M compared to PG 7 V?
https://o.b5z.net/i/u/6070324/i/ec/RPG_7_Complete_Rocket_Set_i2.jpg
6I would state yes because otherwise there would instead be two entries on the details panel. There is not so I deduce that its the same.
-
I'm sure I remember reading and also experiencing within the game that the deploy/pack times are not hard values. They are variable and changed based upon various factors (can't remember what factors). So were you taking that into account in your list above?
-
Looks like you have a duplicated entry for my CMBN mod;
http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/cm-mod-warehouse/?s=no+formation+markings+mod
-
https://wartimecanada.ca/sites/default/files/documents/Infantry Training- part VIII_0.pdf
Been trying to take the things in Chapter 4 and see whether can use them within CM.
-
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:
@CanuckGamer When barrages go off target like this, it's because the spotter didn't spot (enough of) the spotting round impacts.
Or because you have chosen Emergency in the parameters.
-
2 hours ago, IanL said:
Doesn't @Bil Hardenberger 's set of icons look like this? These look like the symbols for individual tanks and guns.
I presume that you are referring to http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=1120. Then in which case then nope. Similarities between some symbols but it's not the same. Compare the icons for machine guns and mortars to those on page 9 on the last link.
-
Well come on now be honest, someone's been messing about with the strings.txt, haven't they.
-
There was one on the British Army youtube channel an while back. Was rather cool. Going to try find the thing again for you.
There we go the Rifles using GPMG (SF) in Kenya.
-
No problem. I was looking at using the thing to assist me in making some icons. The other mods available for icons tend to be just Yankee or Hun versions. Could not see any Commonwealth ones which I tend to play as exclusively and therefore was wishing for. Barely started making though and not done any more on it since either.
Probably useful for some peoples Youtube channels also in their AAR videos!
-
16 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:
Hmm, maybe I'm misunderstanding what is being said above but AFAIK to Acquire ammo a unit still mounts a transport type vehicle. Some vehicles will share directly for a crew served weapon (HMG, mortars, etc.) if in the same platoon and in ammo sharing distance.
I was going to post much earlier on about this. But in essence that's what I understand. Except that the heavy weapons teams (in other words any infantry that get the same details panel as vehicles do) and the vehicle do not need to be within the same sub-formation (in other words units that are also highlighted when a units selected) to share with each other. The heavy weapon teams do not pickup that ammunition either, rather than taking the ammunition, it just gets added onto the ammo count shown on the details panel only. Units need to be in the same sub-formation in order to share between other infantry types though, and that's an single magazine at an time only when within range and when that ammunitions depleted.
Might do an video some day to illustrate the different types of ammunition sharing.
-
It's fixed and should be included for the engine 4 patches that are coming soon tm.
-
11 hours ago, mjkerner said:
The icons shown depends on the order you create teams from your squad/section. I forgot the progression, but IIRC, there is one. Lol, that's the best I can do. Next.....
I see indeed. The "progression" appears to be fixed upon the detachments designation. A/B/C detachment in an section always gets given the same icon no matter the method they are created. A/B/C detachment also always gets given the same unit type no matter the method they are created. The unit type assigned need have no relation to the soldiers in the detachment. The icon assigned need have no relation to the soldier in the detachment. The unit types assigned need have no relation to the icons or vice versa. Neither the unit type nor icon need have any relation to the Admin command you ordered. And the "progression" seems to be unique to the formations also.
But then I must query the "why" as seems as though that just defeats the purpose in having different style icons? And same thing for having different unit types displayed on the unit information panel for detachments. What's the point when they have no meaning?
-
Started another QB and chose to test upon an section from the Engineer Squadron [Field].
I used the Scout Team command twice upon them. The second detachment that was created is highlighted in the screenshot below. Bren unit type but with no Bren. Also regular Infantry icon instead this time rather than either the Bren or Pioneer icon.
-
Here I was, unable to get to sleep, gave up trying in the end and decided to bugger it and fire the computer back up and go on Combat Mission and now I need to query this;
How does the game decide upon what icons to use for the various units created through the Admin commands? I always assumed that it was quite simple and that commands just resulted in the same icon as it's parent unit. That's been my experience so far with the icons on units made with the various Admin commands. That is until this morning.
So I'm in a QB and its September 1944 in Holland and among my forces I have an Parachute Company [Independent].
So in the screen shot above you can see this section. Earlier on I used the Combine command on them and they have then sustained three casualties (medic saw to one earlier hence just two casualties existing in screenshot). I then decided to use the Scout Team command in order to send two men back to medic the remaining two casualties. And the screenshot below is the team and icon that resulted.
I reloaded the save and tried the Antitank Team command with them also and that resulted in the same soldiers chosen (that parts not strange given the available troops to choose from) and the same Bren icon (and Bren unit type on the information panel also). I've also just started an new QB and tried the Scout Team and Antitank Team commands with some sections that have not had the Combine command used upon them, and that resulted in the same as above.
So yeah how does the game decide what icons are to be used, also what unit type to give the detachments created. Given that it does not appear from the above to have anything to do with the Admin commands used nor the parent units icon/unit type.
-
I stopped reading at around page 5. I’ve not checked any statements as yet so not adding myself to the list. But figured would mention a little tale thats semi-relevant to the discussion;
Guess what the last time my bank blocked my card to prevent a fraudulent transaction was? It was back in 2017 and the transaction they blocked was me purchasing my first Combat Mission game through the store.
Went to the bank and was put onto a phone to sort it out and the reason that was blocked as suspicious was due to the amount (was the CMBN Big Bundle) and something about the payment going to somewhere in the US rather than here in UK. I also remember him remarking “huh I’ve heard of battlefield but never heard of battlefront before” when I said what the purchase was.
I got home and then attempted the purchase again, the paypal route instead though. The rest as they say is history.
-
18 hours ago, Anson Pelmet said:
But is there a benefit in CM in having the commander in sight of the battle, if he's in contact with the rest of his force via radio? The only benefit I can think of is being able to call arty strikes.
Units radios (in the WW2 games) do not function when those units are on the move. And can sometimes take time to come back up. The visual communications do not suffer that disadvantage. Contact is kept even when both units are on the move so long as they can see each other. Same thing with the voice communications as so long as they are within about 50 meters (about 15 when hiding) contact is kept even when on the move.
So even though he has that radio the benefit to keeping him in sight of the battle continues to be that the can keep in contact with his force. Think about all those times that you move your platoon commanders. Every time that happens the chain is cut. I would say that adds up to being quite a lot of time out of contact with his force. And maybe not being in contact when it matters.
Having said that I'm also guilty of hiding him away most of the time.
Update on Engine 4 patches
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted · Edited by Oliver_88
On another plus at least I can confirm that on CMBN the various (British) Airborne Infantry formations available in QB are now being provided with thier transport (some drivers do not look very "airborne" but they are there at least). And also that the Vickers detachments that are purchasable in QB are no longer providing you with an useless HQ team in error but are providing you with the Vickers team that you asked for!
On a minus the Parachute Battalion and Machinegun Battalion continue to not be available in QB (for the British) from what I can see and just remain available for scenarios.