Jump to content

1-1 Infantry - Improvements


Recommended Posts

The sort of brush that is in CM:SF's environment isn't great concealment vs. thermals. It's amazing how metal lights up like a christmas tree, especially when it's in the sun. Looking at combat and law enforcement footage you can see how difficult it is to hide something the observer is trained to detect. The LRAS3 systems, for example, have the ability to make a tentative vehicle identification based on the heat signature alone. ANd it can do it at 5,000m and well beyond that too. Granted that is a VERY expensive piece of equipment, however the fact is thermals radically change what concealment is.

When we move to a temperate environment things should change dramatically. First, the natural cover will be orders of magnitude more plentiful and far better in terms of their ability to hide things.

Pretty much every time Adam lodges a complaint about cover being "nerfed" it seems we come right back to the primary point... CM:SF is set in a desert and cover in a desert isn't easy to achieve. Expectations need to be consistent with the environment. I just get the sense from Adam, and others upon occasion, that temperate conditions are the foundation of the opinions and then (quite understandably) they game isn't matching them. They shouldn't :D

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 164
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

About Kornet spotability.

I've had the impression for awhile that one reason why Blue appears 'unbeatable' is because maps are designed so they'd be unbeatable! Not intentionally of course. But while a designer's building a map he subconsciously ponders what would be needed to get Blue from point A to point B. As a counter to that tendency, my last 5(?) maps I built without any thought about who'd be fighting who from which direction. I then set the maps aside for awhile and came back fresh for scenario construction.

One scenario in particular has got some beautiful 1600m+ cross-map Kornet shots, and the launchers are almost impossible for Blue to spot. Its actually rather liberating to concoct tactical problems without purposefully designing-in solutions. How the player solves the problem is none of my concern. You've got the tools, figure out for yourself. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point. The weaponry and sensors that the Blue stuff has were made to win big, open engagements against combined arms at a distance. This is, in other words, the fight Blue *wants* to have when it goes to war because it knows it's likely to win. Especially if Red botches the execution of their doctrine. And it's exactly why the Blue forces, in real life, have had some pretty significant problems dealing with an enemy that doesn't want to play using the Cold War Rule Set :)

Also note that the previous ATGM systems of Blue, specifically TOW, MILAN, and various others were a lot like the Soviet/Russian AT-XX series of ATGMS. The US spent a pretty damned big chunk of money to change that capability to be fire and forget, man portable. DRAGON was a half step, JAVELIN is the full step. Meanwhile, the Soviet era designs are still the norm for Red. Even AT-14 KORNET is along these same design lines, though much better effect of course.

To me this sort of stuff in CM:SF doesn't concern me, it excites me because it appears we have the modeling functioning pretty well. Since our goal always has been, and always will be, to simulate things based on reality and not perception or "gamey" reasons, we're pretty pleased with the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But getting IR camouflage right is actually pretty complex; it's definitely not a case of WISIWYG. The U.S. Military actually spends a lot of time and money figuring out how to do this, and I'm not sure every Syrian regular is going to be all that savvy with this kind of thing.

I'm sure they could find a copy of PREDATOR in Syira.

(How effective would that technique actually be in reality?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure they could find a copy of PREDATOR in Syira.

(How effective would that technique actually be in reality?).

In a humid/hot area, caked mud wouldn't stay caked long. And if they had crappy IR it'd work for a little while, you'd be more less uniform temp. as the mud. Throwing a "warm" blanket over yourself probably works better, but I must admit, no one wants to wallow in mud and confirm my suspicions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I thought Steve had said we were going to get a boost in cover and concealment from the "scrapes" to bring them more into line with real foxholes.

Something about a compromise for the fact that trenches can't be hidden - to give the defender somewhere to fight from.

Maybe my memory is being wishful. :)

That happened in 1.11 IIRC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know there wasn't any tweaks to cover or concealment EXCEPT for the issues revolving around lips of terrain and building roofs. Reason being there hasn't been a compelling case for change. Which gets me back to the discussion over the last few pages... this is an arid environment where cover and concealment, at least the natural types, are few and far inbetween. Unless you start talking about folds in terrain, tall grass, man made structures, etc. Then cover and/or concealment can be quite good.

Steve

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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.


×
×
  • Create New...