Lukmak5 Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Hi all I used to be (and still am) CMx1 die hard fan. I thought of getting CMSF from the beginning but all the bugs and negative reviews had put me back. I came back to the BF forum when I found a mention of CMx2: Normandy somewhere. I looked at the CMSF again and thought I'll give it a try. Just played the demo and few things came to my mind: 1. With Q9450, Radeon 3870CSX, and 4RAM, I get only 24FPS avg (Fraps) in training and smashing steel scenarios. In heavy urbanized scenarios I got between 7-18. (1920-1200, best details) and thats for 2 year old game? I can run Crisis decently, and WiC maxed out with 40FPS avg. 2. Comparing to CMx1 those tanks are freakin snipers, and I remember people moaning, when CMBB came out, that infantry is dying so easily comparing to CMBO. Well in CMSF, on open map inf is being decimated in seconds. 3. Geezz, Never knew that those T-72s are so weak. One M1 just shattered about seven of them in 2 minutes. Cheers Luke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Welcome to CM:SF, Lukmak5! 1. With Q9450, Radeon 3870CSX, and 4RAM, I get only 24FPS avg (Fraps) in training and smashing steel scenarios. In heavy urbanized scenarios I got between 7-18. (1920-1200, best details) and thats for 2 year old game? I can run Crisis decently, and WiC maxed out with 40FPS avg. CM:SF has way more going on behind the scenes than either of these games. Most of the reasons for the low framerates are things like LOS and ballistics calculation, keeping constant track of morale and C2, so on and so forth. I have a 2 1/2-month old computer and it runs about the same--which is actually fine. CM:SF is quite playable at 10+ FPS. 2. Comparing to CMx1 those tanks are freakin snipers, and I remember people moaning, when CMBB came out, that infantry is dying so easily comparing to CMBO. Well in CMSF, on open map inf is being decimated in seconds. It's not the game engine, it's the vehicles. Tank technology has changed quite a bit since WWII, particularly in the targeting/visuals/etc. departments. Modern tanks (especially Western ones) are equipped with extremely sophisticated targeting systems that make fighting tanks with infantry virtually impossible on open terrain. 3. Geezz, Never knew that those T-72s are so weak. One M1 just shattered about seven of them in 2 minutes. Again, that's due to changing technology. M1s in real life generally can shatter seven T-72s quite easily. Tank guns have advanced at least as fast if not faster than tank armor; you really don't see many former Soviet-bloc tanks surviving even one hit from a modern tank. I haven't played much with the T-90 (I'm a grunt at heart ), but I assume it's not much better. So welcome once again, and enjoy this great game! It will teach you quite a lot about modern warfare. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 The T-72s in the demo are the base models without any modernisation. Also you're fighting at very short ranges. The newer versions are quite a bit more capable (although that says more about how bad the base models are frankly), they spot faster, have better ammunition and I have seen T-90s shrug off quite a few M1 rounds. Not enough to win 1 on 1 fights mind you. I guess you can compare fighting M1s with the older T-72s with fighting panthers and the first generation of the T-34. The T-90 then would be more like the T-34/85. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted March 28, 2009 Share Posted March 28, 2009 Trident-za, if you're getting a bit mixed up with the controls see the sticky with my alternate keys in at the top of the forum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trident-za Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 An update: oh my, I'm SO glad I found this game As a sad consequence of "real life" and being a working, married man I'm only just starting mission 6 of the TF campaign (Screen, part 2?) but I'm completely in love with this game. Awesome! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVulture Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Hi all 3. Geezz, Never knew that those T-72s are so weak. One M1 just shattered about seven of them in 2 minutes. It varies wildly with the t-72 variant. The base ones are very much doomed. The t-72 M1V (covered in reactive armour) will usually survive the first hit from an Abrams (last 2 scenarios I've played have featured 15 of those, and only one died on the first hit). The flip side is that they're not likely to kill an Abrams depsite the better survivability (I didn't lose any of my tanks in taking out those 15 t-72 M1Vs). The t-72 M1V (2001) and t-71 M1V TURMS are further upgrades again, with better guns, upgraded ERA and better accuracy. The TURMS model isn't quite a match for the Abrams one on one, but it quite able to kill them if well used. You'd be doing pretty well to kill 7 TURMS variants with one M1 in 2 minutes I think. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 T72 are weak - unless your men are faced with one while carrying nothing but LAW and AT-4 to defend themselves. Then they look like uberbeasts! It seems whenever assymetric warfare is played in the game it usually involves green Syrian combatants versus veteran Abrams, not often the other way around. 'Combined Arms' combat means you shouldn't think "T72 vs Abrams", you should think "T72, RPG-29, and Kornet vs Abrams, Javelin, and TOW... and the U.S. Airforce"! 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.