the "little" things...

[PrezCartman]

Originally posted by SlowMotion:

If ammo conservation really is the reason that reason could be tweaked. Like you wrote, what's the point of saving ammo for some more important targets that may never appear when the troops that this unit is supposed to support are dying? If they have lots of ammo IMO they should use at least some of it to any threats that appear if it can have effect.

I tried playing that scenario from the blue side, giving commands to Strykers to see how they would perform then. I saw that they quickly became unable to use their MGs because of small caliber fire. I checked the Damage list and it seemed to me that the reason was Optics. Why can't they use MGs even at close range if just Optics are damaged? At least in the FCS Stryker the MG is operated by a crew member who manually aims.

Slow,

In regards to the second part if the optics are knocked out that could basically mean the entire targeting system for the remote controlled gun system. I understand your point at close range that it should be able to shoot, but if the gunner can not see anything through the sight then it isn't unreasonable that it wouldn't fire, that's the advantage of always having a manual human backup for any automated weapons system.

[Dirtweasle]

Originally posted by Wiggum:

I hope most of these problems will be fixed in 1.05 !

Well, for goodness sakes, it's amazing this sort of stuff is not already fixed now, and that a lot of the 1.01 and 1.02 stuff was in the first release.

[SlowMotion]

Originally posted by PrezCartman:

In regards to the second part if the optics are knocked out that could basically mean the entire targeting system for the remote controlled gun system. I understand your point at close range that it should be able to shoot, but if the gunner can not see anything through the sight then it isn't unreasonable that it wouldn't fire, that's the advantage of always having a manual human backup for any automated weapons system.

Yes, Optics in damage list could actually include very many kinds of things. But if it's just the sight, then IMO FCS Stryker should be able to shoot because the MG is NOT remote controlled. In my second screen shot the Stryker is close enough that at least a real soldier could throw a hand grenade (and they destroy Strykers in 1.04) or use some anti tank weapon. Maybe the vehicles should retreat if it cannot use any weapons to defend itself?

[LeBlaque]

Originally posted by Mishga:

[qb] Occupy is broken (in the Editor). Use Touch instead. Been that way since day one. Oh and Max assault and assault are still broken too! Use Advance instead.

Thought this better go on someone's list (taken from another thread). ugggg on above.

Regards,

Leblaque

[Pandur]

another more or less little thing.

i guess its pretty much selfexplaining...

you can see the explosion where the tank is shooting at and where the gun points while doing it. it doesnt look too good while wathing it.

[stikkypixie]

That reminds me of the Allah's Fist scenario. I put my T-62 on a reverse slope, in such a way that the hull is pointing towards the sky, much higher than the main gun can be depressed. Yet they still manage to fire at enemy tanks below.

[Pandur]

hehe, but here its not even that steep. its pretty normal terrain.

[SlowMotion]

Another little thing: for BRMD-2 crews (ATGM and normal) team info panel shows that all crew members have pistols. If they bail out, they all have assault rifles.

[Zemke]

Originally posted by Zemke:

How about Strikers seeking cover from incoming T-62 fire instead of sitting there shooting back! In CM1 the tacAI would never let that happen, or at least I saw plenty of my armored cars and half tracks scrambling to get the heck out of the line of fire.

I guess if I played the game in RT this would not happen, assuming I saw my Striker taking fire in time to micro-mananage the driver, and tell him to seek cover....which in real life/real time as a Company Commander I would not have to personnally order a Striker driver to withdrawn and seek cover....just another reason the WEGO model needs "fixed" not only for TCIP, but for single player play also. Last WEGO IS the very essence of what Combat Mission is or was. WEGO give you time to think about what was going on and influence the battle. Granted play in RT is ok if you only do small battles (platoon), but anything larger and you start to run into serious problems that would not be realistic on the battlefield....reason...subordinate commanders would not have to be micro-managed and would excute the intent of the commander....me. Sorry if I diverage from the original intent of this post somewhat.

[Cpl Steiner]

I would like to see an option to enable a CMx1 style "cutaway" map mode - i.e. one in which the edges of the map project downwards to a flat plain somewhere below the surface. It could be turned on and off with a hot-key. I have never found the "sand floating above sand" look of CMx2 very aesthetically pleasing and it doesn't really pull off the illusion of no map edge as it was intended to do. At the moment it is just one more distraction.

[Pandur]

i acually would like to be able to choose my backgound.

not what you may think, nothing fancy, i just want to swich between this sand like colour we have now and a greenish/brown colour. so i can play light/sand maps with dark background and the otherway round.

i like to have contrast to the real map so i can view it more like "chess board" or something similar to that. now i can hardly see where a long/big sand map ends in the distance, and i regulary try to plot simple fast orders out of the map from far away

well, thats just personal preference but it could please some other people too.

@Zemke

acually the first vehicles where i would think this makes sense are the Techincals, as these are the "real" taxis copared with CMx1. these are verry fargile to small arms and MG fire wich is about the "smalest" type of fire you will encounter in the field.

on top of that, iam a bit turned off by this idea when i imagine pathfinding. its much better since 1.04 but is far from falwless, still. i imagine a big bunch of technicals, somehow stuck together in a big blob like a puzzle you "make" fit rahter than do it like intended. all this with black smoke rising and a bunch of dead ones around

[Lurker765]

Having a way to tell how damaged a building is would be nice. I can't tell if it is about to collapse.

Having the tab key centered on the unit in the CMx1 fashion. In view 6 your unit is in the center of the screen. In views 1-4 it is centered but slightly back of the unit. Right now I press the tab key and then have to use the mouse to see what is going on around the unit.

Labels showing unit status so when you are in a high view you can tell at a glance what is happening in the battle and if a firefight just broke out.

A targetting command that lets you cycle through units your unit can fire at.

Sound identifications. Generic unit identifications. Not knowing that a unit is the HQ unit within one second of spotting them.

Targetting lines showing who is firing at who.

Kill stats on the units. Unit stats as well so you can tell what armor a Bradley can penetrate for instance. Along with useful things such as minimum ranges, if a unit needs to be stationary and for how long before firing, etc.

WEGO data reverting back to the beginning of the turn when you replay a turn rather than showing the data that existed at the end of the turn.

HQ lines drawn from the commander to units under his control so you can easily see where the squads under his control are located.

[ October 15, 2007, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: Lurker765 ]

[M1A1TC]

Target lines

Show all target lines/pathlines

several states of damages for buildings

Loader manning MG on Abrams tank

Gunner scanning for targets on Abrams tank

Better/more/more accurate infantry animation

[Cpl Steiner]

End of battle statistics for each unit as well as in total. As each round is tracked it could potentially be even better than in CMx1.

Example:

1st Squad, 3rd Platoon, C Company:

Ammunition expended:

Type:.................................Number................Hit Rate:

5.56 x 45 mm NATO ball:.........3212.........................4%

AT-4 84mm HEAT:........................2.......................50%

FGM-184 Javelin ATGM:.................2.....................100%

Losses Inflicted:

1x BMP-2

1x T-62M

14x Republican Guard Infantry (5x KIA, 9x WIA)

Losses Sustained:

1x KIA

3x WIA

Achievements:

Objective: Hospital - Secured

[ October 13, 2007, 10:49 AM: Message edited by: Cpl Steiner ]

[SgtMuhammed]

I haven't really looked but does anyone know if the M1 TCs in the game can use the half closed position on their hatch? It should give them better scanning than fully buttoned but better protection than opened. Actually is this even an option with the M1 anymore?

One small request, fire. Vehicles catch on fire, why not buildings or grass? The banner add shows all kinds of things on fire.

Steiner, your hit rate for M16 is too high.

[SgtMuhammed]

I am beginning to think that maybe medic units would be nice. Even if just for flavor.

[Cpl Steiner]

The Syrian pistol silhouette in the control panel still looks like a US M9 Beretta. The website lists the Syrian pistol as being a Makarov.

Was there ever a silhouette of a Makarov made for the game? Maybe it already exists and just needs putting back in?

Even if it was never made, it surely wouldn't be more than a day's work to add it. I don't like seeing my Syrians running around with US M9 pistols!

[M1A1TC]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

I haven't really looked but does anyone know if the M1 TCs in the game can use the half closed position on their hatch? It should give them better scanning than fully buttoned but better protection than opened. Actually is this even an option with the M1 anymore?

One small request, fire. Vehicles catch on fire, why not buildings or grass? The banner add shows all kinds of things on fire.

Steiner, your hit rate for M16 is too high.

Reall life M1A1 TC hatch can close half-way, not sure about M1A2. I dont see why it wouldnt, I think they are both the same construction. I never seen it in game though

[thelmia]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

Pandur,

I can confirm the continuing ATGM bug. Just played the Salt Pan scenario and saw at least 5 Saggers slam into the ground a couple hundred meters to their front.

Saggers briefly worked in 1.02, then became broken again in 1.03. In 1.0 and 1.01 they would not fire on their own. In 1.02 they did, and worked pretty well. Then with 1.03 they started crashing 150-200m in front of their launchers and lost about 75% of their effectiveness. I made a scenario with Saggers in it, and I played it on all versions. Instead of an average of 4 enemy vehicles destroyed by 6 Sagger teams it became 1.