Jump to content

Engine upgrade 4.0


Reiter
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Muzzleflash1990 said:

Believe they are also not that practical...

Air delivered napalm was incredibly effective in Korea and Viet Nam. I do question the use of manpack flamethrowers though. They were highly dangerous...to the user. Vehicle mounted flamethrowers maybe fall somewhere in the middle.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

39 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Thanks.  That was good to know.  A new cool name to describe folks... that most will have to look up.  :)

Would the adjective/description be "herostratic"?

Sounds correct. For example: "It seems that CMBS players have strong herostratic tendencies"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at the Marine Corps museum near Quantico a few years ago. A vet from the first wave at Iwo was our guide. He was ashore for 5 weeks. A BAR gunner at first, then, after two weeks, a flamethrower operator. He said he used it for three weeks. He felt they should be banned. I cannot adequately convey the haunted look in his face as he talked about how well the flamethrower worked.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Reiter said:

Devs , please inform something about fire, what , when , how?  Is it wrong to ask ? We are playing war simulation , one of the best , but I see some crucial things missing , example the element of fire . Please answer . 

like i sayed all ready , this thing is answered by steve (if i remember right) on RT forum site. sou use search tools. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, snarre said:

like i sayed all ready , this thing is answered by steve (if i remember right) on RT forum site. sou use search tools. 

Ok. Maybe I am just plain stupid then. Tried "Steve, Battlefront , flames"  etc, but found endless swamp with no content what I was searching for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve posted this little snipet about fire in another thread: "ASL tinder effect"

"Unfortunately a game like Combat Mission requires generalization for it to work as a game and yet reasonably portray real life situations. In actual combat there is probably 10 exceptions to every general rule. It's very difficult to simulate those exceptions without them becoming the standard. The example we've used since CMx1 days is the ASL "tinder" rules where you can light fire to something. While certainly deliberately setting a fire was done in real life here and there, gamers used it as a standard tactic. And that's not right at all. "

He developed a bit about it in another post that I cant seem to find atm.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see a weapons toggle system, like the one in the Wargame series, so that you can choose which weapon to use in a given situation. This would be a way to improve the game's current problems with units not using the correct weapon in a given situation (like BMPs using autocannons against MBTs rather than their ATGM).

Fire would be awesome. Currently the game does not do justice to the power of the RPO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AtheistDane said:

I would like to see a weapons toggle system, like the one in the Wargame series, so that you can choose which weapon to use in a given situation. This would be a way to improve the game's current problems with units not using the correct weapon in a given situation (like BMPs using autocannons against MBTs rather than their ATGM).

Have you tried the newest update to CMBS? Before the new update I saw my Brads using their autocannons against armored targets way too much, and neglecting their TOWs. Now after the patch this issue seems to be completely gone. My Brads use their TOWs almost exclusively against tanks, and once their out of ammo they retreat to find a place to reload. I've only seen Brads engaging tanks with their autocannons out of sheer desperation, an absolute last resort now. Not sure if this new behavior applies to the BMP as well though. 

As far as fire and all that, I would definitely like to see smoke effects improved upon. Little things, like smoke and dust hanging around for a bit longer, especially smoke from a burning vehicle and the like. 

However what I would like to see before any of that is more fire support options. Specifically in the modern titles, artillery needs ICM. I also really want to see cluster munitions deployed by aircraft. They are extremely effective in conventional operations, and would certainly be used heavily in the scenario CMBS portrays. I want to see aircraft with more munition options as well. For instance it would be nice if you could have a plane ripple its bombs off, so instead of taking 5-8 minutes for every one bomb, you could just order the plane to drop all of its bombs in a target area. This would primarily be for dumb bombs, but it would be a nice feature. FASCAM deployed by artillery would be a cool feature as well, but that could pose some gameplay/coding problems so its lower on my list. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 19/11/2016 at 4:57 PM, IICptMillerII said:

Have you tried the newest update to CMBS? Before the new update I saw my Brads using their autocannons against armored targets way too much, and neglecting their TOWs. Now after the patch this issue seems to be completely gone. My Brads use their TOWs almost exclusively against tanks, and once their out of ammo they retreat to find a place to reload. I've only seen Brads engaging tanks with their autocannons out of sheer desperation, an absolute last resort now. Not sure if this new behavior applies to the BMP as well though. 

As far as fire and all that, I would definitely like to see smoke effects improved upon. Little things, like smoke and dust hanging around for a bit longer, especially smoke from a burning vehicle and the like. 

However what I would like to see before any of that is more fire support options. Specifically in the modern titles, artillery needs ICM. I also really want to see cluster munitions deployed by aircraft. They are extremely effective in conventional operations, and would certainly be used heavily in the scenario CMBS portrays. I want to see aircraft with more munition options as well. For instance it would be nice if you could have a plane ripple its bombs off, so instead of taking 5-8 minutes for every one bomb, you could just order the plane to drop all of its bombs in a target area. This would primarily be for dumb bombs, but it would be a nice feature. FASCAM deployed by artillery would be a cool feature as well, but that could pose some gameplay/coding problems so its lower on my list. 

I have downloaded and installed the newest patch, but I haven't had a lot of time to play.  I'll have time to do some proper testing in the Christmas holidays and report back if things are better with the new patch. 

Improving fire support options would be nice as well :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

Seriously though, I doubt anything is coming out in the next two weeks, but BFC has surprised us more than once.  CMFI came from nowhere, for instance.

I'd agree with all of that. I'm sure that BFC would love to bring something out for Christmas, but if the computer gods do not smile it ain't gonna happen.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...