Jump to content

Aquila-SmartWargames

Members
  • Posts

    377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Aquila-SmartWargames

  1. works again Thanks to @Dr.Fusselpulliand @Vacilllator I got the campaign but it is 512mb with the mods folder and too big for my db right now, will look for a solution but if one got free capacity you´re welcome
  2. A grand for every Dropbox access. Wanted to make clear that this mod was made afaik by @MikeyD . With the help of @37mm we converted it to CMSF2 Dropbox link can be accessed via my signature and this thread aswell:
  3. For most systems roughly at this point the performance investment starts to steeply increase. It is very map size dependant Improved ist the sweet spot for me as I don´t want to tinker around with the setting before every scenario and it should cover a wide range of recent gen systems with a good performace base, +/- as one sees fit. With my new battleship I could go higher but high fps - especially fluid camera movement/panning - are priority for me. So on smaller maps and/or with a powerful system one can go higher for sure, some max it out on bigger maps aswell as they might favor better terrain/tree draw distance but the fps impact can be tremendous. I´ve seen players being content with what appeared to be 15fps why others aim for the tripple/quadruple of this. Eventually - as often - it comes down to personal preference.
  4. It was a fun CM night for sure Is it fine now? If so I will unlock the video again
  5. It is true that I don´t treat mails concerning games, shopping, etc. with the same attention as my professional or private emails. I read download ready and just located the link. I was not aware that bf prefers it this way. I put the video on private.
  6. I played the Warsaw 44 operation in CMBB just months ago. Seeing this resurrected in CM2 with FR would be a great thing. About the movie, never saw it, is there a way to watch it in Polish with English subtitles somewhere?
  7. It was no big deal, I recommend to replace it with the CMCW model. I wasn´t around here for some time. The new People´s Beta will include a new campaign is that correct?
  8. - more control for scenario designers when it comes to CMRT pre-planned air support - and/or reassessment of friendly fire strike chances - leaving the current CMRT system in its foundation intact in order to prevent issues for existing scenarios
  9. I guess one must do many things wrong in order to always end up with multi-minute delays just to get his men out of harms way in CM1. The claim that such challenges don´t matter for platoon and company level sounds like an opinion based on the fact that videogames is probably the closest one came to an infantry officer course or actual command. It was obvious beforehand that it is a feature some like some don´t, hence why an optional implementation. Persistent maps were also a great feature.
  10. Switching CMRT´s air support to how the other titles handle it was not the point of the question.
  11. Is there any news that Red Thunder´s air support system will see a rework with Fire & Rubble?
  12. A feature to consider for engine upgrades is the command delay of CM1 being reinstated as an optional setting.
  13. Yes, lets focus on Fire and Rubble, Engine Upgrades and other upcoming CM content. That is more interesting.
  14. My post was meant to support your statement not to question it Good article published by the US Army Medical Department: https://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/woundblstcs/chapter11.htm On the WW2 US M1 "Some aspects of the value of the M1 helmet are discussed by Beebe and DeBakey in their book on battle casualties.4More recently, Norman Hitchman5 of the Army's Operations Research Office reviewed some of the World War II casualty statistics and reached some important and timely conclusions regarding the value of wearing a helmet in combat. The following observations resulted from this statistical analysis: 1. Of all hits upon the helmet, 54 percent were defeated. 2. For every 100 men wounded while wearing helmets, 9.6 men received wounds in the cranium. Without the helmet, it would be expected that 11.4 men would be wounded in the head. 3. The M1 helmet prevented a number of incapacitating hits equal to 10 percent of the total hits on the body. 4Beebe, Gilbert W., and DeBakey, Michael F.: Battle Casualties. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas, 1952, p. 176. 5Hitchman, N. A.: Keep Your Head . . . Keep Your Helmet. Army 8:42-44, September 1957. 4. The estimated savings in total battle casualties means that the helmet in World War II probably prevented wounds in more than 70,000 men. A significant proportion of these men would have been killed had the helmet not been worn. 5. To get the same amount of saving by protecting other regions, body armor weighing more than twice as much as the helmet would have to be provided." - Should be also obvious that the main purpose of a helmet was not to protect from direct good-angle impact penetration by rifle rounds or them to do wonders. "However, battle casualty survey studies during World Wars I and II and the Korean War have shown that the primary wounding agent among the WIA and the KIA casualties was the fragmentation-type weapon" - that helmets cover a small part of the body is evident but it should be obvious that the upper cranium is one of the most critical areas when it comes to incapacitation and/or death. It is also a good idea to think outside of a wargamer chair as everybody with a service record would point this out: what is a more-than-usual exposed body part when situated in a trench, foxhole or in a typical (prone) firing position? Exactly. Thus simply comparing helmet body % vs overall body % is lacking. - For the French Adrian helmet 60-70% reduction in shrapnel head injury are thrown around in articles. These are secondary/tertiary sources and I never saw the primary source so I am in doubt about this high numbers without sighting the ps, could be "Helmets and Body Armor in Modern Warfare" by Dean, Bashford (1920) but not confirmed. The soldiers were often subject to shrapnel projectiles coming from above, these numbers could be very situational. - it was stated in this thread that the true protection of WW2 steel helmets is in the dark and that is exactly the case and what a good researcher/expert would point out. - Being almost a decade involved with military professionals, studying at military schools, reading multiple, multilingual sources, witnessing shrapnel/fragmentation and the protection of similar fashioned gear first hand I can´t remember coming across an opinion stating WW2 helmet shrapnel protection did not matter too much as it would be self-evident. Despite this it is not a really important discussion for me as I am currently fine with how the CM simulation behaves when it comes to frag/shrapnel and that headgear is to some extent incorporated is a fine extra.
  15. I would like to see the source that states that a WW2 steel helmet doesn´t matter too much and only offer a slight reduction in injury when it comes to shrapnel protection.
×
×
  • Create New...