medlinke Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 Hi all, I don't know if this has already been brought up, but if it hasn't. Task Force Marks It's a scenario about a special ops raid on a terrorist camp in an area where support for the base will be quick in coming... There must be 100 different ways to play it and it provides quite a challenge. In light of recent developments I think it gives me a new respect for what a well armed terrorist force could potentially do. Thank you for the insight through your product Major H 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich12545 Posted October 22, 2001 Share Posted October 22, 2001 I tried to take a look at this scenario and it only opened in a very small window. Do you know what the problem is? Also, I read there will be a 4.0. Can you tell me what it will entail and about when it will arrive? Thank you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medlinke Posted October 23, 2001 Author Share Posted October 23, 2001 it opens in a small window because the map is very small. You aren't missing out on other terrain. It's a great 1 to 1.5 hour play. After 2 days I'm still playing this scenario. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoffel Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 Hopefully it will be out in February next year With a lot of new units,make sure you join the mailing list,you won't miss anything than on the new developments 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embar Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by medlinke: Hi all, I don't know if this has already been brought up, but if it hasn't. Task Force Marks<hr></blockquote> ...and its siblings TF Fenwick (US Army, ie. Javelins instead of Dragons and Apaches instead of Cobras) and Battle Group Fullerton (Canadian forces, ie. no attack helos and Eryx ATGMs). Good hunting, Embar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhuffjr Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 This scenerio demonstrates the difficulty of using helicopters in a shoulder fired sam environment. At least for my first go at it. I learned the hard way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajorH TacOps Developer Posted October 23, 2001 Share Posted October 23, 2001 >I tried to take a look at this scenario and it only opened >in a very small window. Do you know what the problem is? That is correct program behavior. TacOps does not stretch or shrink maps to fill the monitor. The map for Task Force Marks is a small map so its window does not take up the whole screen - unless you choose to change your screen resolution with the Windows Display control panel. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embar Posted October 24, 2001 Share Posted October 24, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by dhuffjr: This scenerio demonstrates the difficulty of using helicopters in a shoulder fired sam environment. At least for my first go at it. I learned the hard way.<hr></blockquote> Yes... at least if you don't have snipers to nail the SAM crews before the helos go in On a somewhat bragging note: I've managed to complete Marks and Fenwick in 33 minutes with 2% friendly losses against a maxed-out OPFOR Fullerton is harder if you give OPFOR all their attack helos (in Marks and Fenwick the Cobras/ Apaches have Stingers to fend them off), so I usually end up with 10-15% Canadian losses BTW, Major - it seems as if the Canadian snipers are rather less accurate than the US ones (they take on average about two minutes longer to clear the perimeter of the camp). Similarly the Canadian artillery seems to be less accurate (deviates further in spite of having the same "accuracy level" according to the game). Is this a bug or a feature? Kind regards, Embar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medlinke Posted October 24, 2001 Author Share Posted October 24, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Embar: BTW, Major - it seems as if the Canadian snipers are rather less accurate than the US ones (they take on average about two minutes longer to clear the perimeter of the camp). Similarly the Canadian artillery seems to be less accurate (deviates further in spite of having the same "accuracy level" according to the game). Is this a bug or a feature? <hr></blockquote> Well, that depends...Does TacOps model Hockey Night in Canada? I mean I live in Michigan and when that's on I can't even concentrate...so maybe they have little TVs with them...who knows. Seriously though How many times have you attempted that scenario? Sometimes you can get some really bad luck and things like that can happen. Or maybe....well...okay I have no maybe. It's probably not a bug though unless you see it happening time and again in the same situation on the same scenario. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajorH TacOps Developer Posted October 24, 2001 Share Posted October 24, 2001 I checked the code - the entries and tables for snipers are identical for the Canadian and U.S. units. Same with the entries and tables for arty responsiveness and accuracy. Many details in TacOps are defined by a span of possible values/probabilities/outcomes. Thus it is possible for combat results to vary significantly even though the event or situation of the instant is similar or identical to earlier ones. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embar Posted October 25, 2001 Share Posted October 25, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by medlinke: How many times have you attempted that scenario? <hr></blockquote> I ran the first ten minutes of the three scenarios (Marks, Fenwick, Fullerton) 20 times each to see if it was just bad luck or if it was a persistant feature. That's why I said "on average" in the above post - having bad luck in a couple or three re-runs is one thing, but twenty times in a row...? Hm. Come to think of it, the Canucks use 4 sniper teams while the US forces get 2 sniper and 2 recon teams. Going through the notes again, it seems that the US recon teams have a higher rate of fire than the US snipers (the recon teams fire around 3 shots per minute, the snipers about 2 shots per minute) which allows them to clear their respective perimeter sections faster than the snipers clear theirs (in spite of the recon teams having lower hit probabilities and a shorter range than the snipers). This would explain why it takes so much longer clearing the perimeter in Fullerton. I still don't know why Canadian 155mm arty regularly deviates 200+ meters on accuracy "3" though Kind regards, Embar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhuffjr Posted October 25, 2001 Share Posted October 25, 2001 I too caught on to the sniper/recon tactic. Something that I have also tinkered with is changing the units to all recon teams to simulate a special forces type of force. More one sided but who said war was fair. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embar Posted October 26, 2001 Share Posted October 26, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>I wrote: Going through the notes again, it seems that the US recon teams have a higher rate of fire than the US snipers (the recon teams fire around 3 shots per minute, the snipers about 2 shots per minute) ...<hr></blockquote> Correction: recon teams fire 4 shots per minute until they run out of targets, sniper teams only fire 2 shots per turn. Later, Embar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.