Sitzkrieg Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 I know, I know. When it's ready. Reason I ask is because of one very nasty bug I ran into last night. The upper-level/balcony "negative cover" bug. Played a battle where my units were in ambush position at the start in upper-levels or balconys. No time to redeploy before enemy contact. Once the shooting started, every man in 3 of my squads was down in less than 30 seconds. Nasty bug that is detracting from the game a bit as it is putting artificial limits on the player (avoid upper-levels and balconys). Any information is appreciated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 I can't say that's a 'bug' so much as sloppy scenario design. Balconies suck, balconies always sucked. From what I can gather balconies were meant to suck! "Causing tactical headaches" can be a legitimate purpose for a game feature, rather like including impassable 'marsh' tiles. So scenario designers should either place a couple balconies deliberately to cause the player tactical troubles (something I'll plead guilty to), or should deliberately place them in a neutral place on the map to avoid problems, or not place them at all. The trouble comes when the orders are "defend this building!", but the designer has thoughtlessly thrown up balconies everywhere as mere eye candy. Like inadvertantly surrounding your armor with marsh terrain. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Possibly would make sense to touch up tactical AI of subdivisions, that they kept indoors on a balcony, if a purpose is visible from the internal windows of building? P.S. I suggest in this theme to offer wishes to the patch 1.21 and to abandon reports on found out "bugs". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Actually at once and will make a first suggestion: 1. To add to the transport vehicles besides cartridges and grenades to RPG yet and hand-grenades, in boxes for 10 things. 2. To add a function to "FILL up AMMUNITION", during activating of which subdivision self is gathered additionally by the necessary amount of ammunitions. 3. Add ammunitions of 5.45mm and grenades of VOG-25 to GP-30 (and possibly grenades to RPG-29) in the cars of UAZ. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitzkrieg Posted September 30, 2009 Author Share Posted September 30, 2009 MikeyD, I thought I was getting slaughtered on the second floor as well. I'll check this again when I can. I know there is a LOS problem someone posted on the CMSF general forum a couple of weeks ago where they were able to spot and shoot through a building to the second floor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 Shooting through to the second floor - in my experience it often has to do with how the building's constructed. If its a 'complex' of connected buildings with interior wall deleted the building's going to be as porous as a sieve. I even once spotted a unit run outside through the crack in the wall(!), though I couldn't recreate it in a test to save my life. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meade95 Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 From what BFC has said...this is a bug and was tweaked in the last patch and made things out of whack some.....and is being tweaked back down some to make it more reasonable. Can't wait till 1.21 patch comes out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil stanbridge Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 What about a 'unfill' with reference to the ammo selection - there doesn't appear to be any way to drop the ammo if you make a bad choice, or you want a light team. I presume weight makes an impact? Also, a delete save game option would be nice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 it would be not badly, to teach some fighters not to recharge a weapon under the fire of opponent. Concretely grenade launchers with RPG-7/-16/-29/SWAM and BMP-1/2 (ATMG) I.e. if a grenade launcher is exposed to the fire (the "indicator of suppression" increases), he stops to recharge and takes shelter, or abandons position. And presently grenade launchers become non-permanent 'kamikadze' often. Clearly, that and in the real fight grenade launcher target 1, but the same does not mean that he must be wood from neck up. In respect of BMP-1/2, they firing off the ATMG begin at once it to recharge, but here often in weed their sights and in a cruising of their weapon radius there are enemies which can be staggered and from other types of weapon, however BMP to become defenceless on enough long time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 It would be desirable to be in a position to create in a game - "caponier" / "tank trench" (I do not know how it on english, in general trench for a technique). For what such "object": 1. At creation of defensive in the editor of game, in a section where trenches are, the "tank trench" of the standard fixed size would not prevent similarly. Certainly in a game and now at certain ability it is possible to create pit of acceptable form, however very difficult this process is, and the got "trench" not always is comfortable for the use. 2. The immobile tanks of T54/55 are used in a game as it would be necessary by default to place stationary instruments in a "caponier" (tank trench). There are stationary instruments in the real life, especially on the base of tanks always try to place in the special trenches. 3. It would be desirable, what in a game fighting machines, being in a position independently to create a trench, created under itself a trench, at placing on a tactical map before the beginning of fight, because now it does infantry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 I do not know 'bug' it or not, but not for all front-rank observers in a section an inventory is present binoculars. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Why does BMP-3 have 9 landings places in place of 7(except the place of commander of machine), how it is specified in technical descriptions of this APC? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMP-3 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 I believe this has been addressed. A search would perhaps find more information on this forum. At the platoon level, there are enough seats in the BMP's to transport the riflemen. However, that requires splitting off one or two men from different sections into other BMP's. That would be a HUGE game and coding nightmare. The game solution is to "flex" the seating up one or two spots. Now all the men in a platoon can find a seat in their BMP's. This is also true for Stryker platoons. (All this is from memory. If it is wrong, my apologies. Again, a use the forum "search" tool for some in depth commentary.) Regards, Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Understood, thank you. Well if it is very needed, certainly and 20 persons can climb. And is a seating capacity for an infantry in 'Bredly' increased on the same principle? And accordingly size of infantry section? If yes, it looks a little strange, one business to necessarily, and an another matter the size of a constant of infantry section. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Yes, the Bradley is treated the same way. And for the same reasons, the AI to get squads to reform in a coherent manner was to much work for such a small thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Thank's for the info. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 It would be desirable, that after completion of fight, to view of tactical map at the destroyed technique at a choice its mouse, the panel of damages was visible, that it is possible it was better to understand how this machine was exactly destroyed (badly that by sight damages are not represented on 3d model of technique). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 It would be good, if at the call of artillery / aviation support for Syria, to hear radio negotiations (BETTER CERTAINLY ON ARABIC), commenting what be going on, as if you played at US. Such radios negotiations help to be better oriented in that, what stage a process of call of support is on. By the way it would be desirable however to see a normal (new) 3d model for engineering strayker М1132. Strange, that here only I write the suggestions for game, not a who it does not interest anymore? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSwan Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 It would be good, if at the call of artillery / aviation support for Syria, to hear radio negotiations (BETTER CERTAINLY ON ARABIC), commenting what be going on, as if you played at US. Such radios negotiations help to be better oriented in that, what stage a process of call of support is on. Well, iirc, the manual says that in a realistic war scenario between the West and Syria, the Syrian air force will be completely annihilated and can only offer resistance for a very short time. I doubt we'll ever have RED Air Support. But yes, if we could have it, we would have surely heard it in Arabic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 I mean Syrian AirSupport for another scenarios. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 It would be desirable to see visual realization of wind in a game. It would be good, if wind was represented as a dust rising from earth in direction proper blowing wind and in an amount proper strength of wind and type of terrine. So in the desert at high wind it would be desirable to see a sandy storm, deteriorative visibility. Besides visual beauty realization of this idea will give: 1. It is better to be oriented to direction of wind, to do a smoke-screen. 2. Will hamper not honest determination of location of moving hostile vehicles on a dust track (out of limits of the real visibility of the troops, on other end of map). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hcrof Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Alex - I have my own list of suggestions that I occasionally give to BFC You have some very good ideas and I hope Steve etc are reading this. I wouldn't hold out hope too much on these happening any time soon though, It seems to me that right now if it is not applicable for Normandy it won't make it in. We will just have to wait for CMSF2! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 I too hope that he will read ;-) One more idea: It will be good to visual for units, then they scanning horizon in search for the enemy. For example vehicle have main breech-sight and commander siege, the main sight has attachment to a main gun it mean that when the shooter scanning horizon hi must turn the torrent. A main sight usually better then command sight (large frequency rate of optics, or maybe termovision) but it have little of review. Some of Infantry troops into the squad too may turn around for searching enemy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 It would be desirable, to see the visual reflection changing type of shell in accordance with a target, i mean animation of recharging. Above all things it touches the operators of RPG, and especially operators of RPG-7, because at times evidently, that one grenade is attachment on a barrel, and other flies away to a target. And it would be desirable, that there was a process of recharging at changing of type of CHARGED ammo. --- Very useful will be to teach operator of RPG-7 to use the fragment grenades of OG-7V on the litearmored vehicles being beyond striking distance cumulative grenades (when shooter have some type of AT grenades). Often meeting example: the operator of RPG-7 have cumulative grenades of PG-7VL (with a tandem war-head) having bad ballistics and distance of aiming shot ~150m, and similarly he have fragment grenades of OG-7V with good ballistics and long-range of aiming shot. An enemy (for example Hammer or BRDM or yet that) is in the distance ~350-400m from RPGshooter, to stagger him the cumulative grenade of PG-7VL of pointers unable, but it fully can hit by the grenade of OG-7V, but now in the game shooter will use it only after he using up all cumulative grenades. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeroma Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 1.21?? more animations,animations,animations!! and infantry menager 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.