Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About olro

  • Rank
    Lance Corporal
  1. olro

    Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy

    A video AAR from Combat Mission Normandy I did of a PBEM. It gets hectic at the end!!! Watch in HD. Part 1: Part 2: Part 3: Part 4:
  2. It all comes down to killing the hive mind, as always. You read it first here.
  3. Love the new Afghanistan game. There are rumours of some historical inaccuracies in the force compositions, like BMD2s replacing the more widely used BTRs. Overall very happy with it. Most of the missions are very close to real actions; guarding convoys and taking out mujas before they escape encirclements. Infantry is very surviveable in the rough terrain. That is my favourite feature of the whole game series.
  4. olro

    Taliban running out of ammunition

    My friend who serves with the ISAF forces in Afghanistan told me this story about a well being built by ISAF in one of the villages; Instead of having the local women walk miles to get water they could now have water very close to their village. The week after the well was built ISAF forces noticed it was now full of rocks. So ISAF removed them. Some days later they came back and noticed the same thing had happened. It turned out was actually the women themselves who had put the rocks in there. Why? The mile long walks to the well outside the village was the only time the women had a chance to socialize properly, without the watchful eyes of the men. Moral of the story? Im not quite sure, BUT it might show how our western ideas of collective nation building - schools - electricity - running water - police - public order, arent entirely what works when you have such deeply ingrained social structures in place.
  5. olro

    As I of banned !

    Im just being curious, but... is there a pancake like sound when the game asks for your cd-key? Is that what you meant? Not trying to patronize, just trying to get my head around that sentence.
  6. Yes, there has been a lot of changes in the AIs reaction to incoming fire in the latest patches. They will often run away from suppressed buildings into better cover, pop smoke, toss grenades when convenient. Both vehicles and infantry. AI that can plan their own attack on a certain position and get away with it, woha! Yes, Panther Games duz it very well indeed (the best) for its operational scope, still, on a 2d map with major abstractions to how its presented visually (NATO symbols and terrain values). Of course this demands less of your pc. Doing this with individual units mano el mano 3d style, tracking each bullet and impact points...... well the closest I can think of is the Total War Series :)
  7. Ah, ze issue of ze micro-management.... Is this measured in the amount of mouse/keyboard clicks it takes to complete an objective or something? Look, this is not C&C. My preferred playing style is very comfortable; I get up in the morning, make some coffe, play a minute round and send it back to my opponent via email. No waiting around for a bunch of people on a multiplayer server, no bad syncs, cheaters, bad scenario bugs/design/unrealistic features or low pings, no having to wait for a certain weekday to play my favorite game with a gaming community. No having to spend a large amount of time talking/guiding other players. Id characterize all of the above as micro management, sure! Get some perspective plhuuueese... The amount of mouse /movement clicking I do when playing any fps is vastly more than what I do in CMSF. And I control a lot more units as well. If you get caught up in realtime, sure, it can be stressfull. Some people insist of playing it this way though (stuck in their own ways?) and then complain about the micromanagement. Simply play turn based - solved, OR pause (then plot movements) when playing solitaire. Its a non issue really. Another thing; im a bit confused when people say they want things to go smoothly, as in no micro management. What do they really mean? Over the years Ive come to the conclusion that they expect their plans to have no flaws. They want no friction, no challenge!. Im amazed at the amount of players who complain about realistic real life issues that can happen to units in war. The shitty communication, misunderstandings, fratricide, I expect this and enjoy it! Most people dont. Many are just whiners. What they want is for their units to turn on a dime in a second or less or for their newly modded M4 too shoot straighter than a ruler in any conditions, they want to be super heroes! Well then you get the stress that comes with a certain playing style! You want to control battalions and have your cake and eat it too. If you want very very little tactical control, go play the COTA, HTTR franchise. It can be a good thing :)
  8. Here is a pretty sweet thread showing youtube films from all missions in the first campaign "Taskforce Thunder". All with commentary: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=90433
  9. Oh, you laugh now... history proved these wrong too: «Man will not fly for 50 years.» Wilbur Wright, American aviation pioneer, to brother Orville, after a disappointing flying experiment, 1901 (their first successful flight was in 1903). «The horse is here to stay but the automobile is only a novelty, a fad.» The president of the Michigan Savings Bank advising Henry Ford's lawyer not to invest in the Ford Motor Co., 1903. «There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.» Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC), maker of big business mainframe computers, arguing against the PC in 1977. And now: "....because this is the stuff of fantasy. It would not happen in the near future at best, for a few hundred years is more likely". Simon C, Gunnery Sergeant from Derbyshire UK, arguing against boytitaniums Remote Control Personal Computer in 2010. ;-P
  10. Wiggum, thanks for that cool AAR! Looking good.
  11. Latest part of the warfilm :P
  12. Some are fascinated by the mere look of warfare, hence so many of the ARMA addon makers making blingbling addons that are just that, blingbling. It looks good and can be exciting. You feel like you are in the centre of things and what you do matters. The simulation aspect isnt really needed as it "looks and quacks like a duck, then it surely must be a duck". Others will be captivated by the underlying mechanics of the warmachines, hence hardcore sims like Steel Beasts and Falcon 4.0. These can be very dry and sterile after a while, as little time is spent on storylines and personal involvement. High learning curve and no active interest in how warmachines work kills this gaming type for many. Then you have the operational grand scale games for the history buffs who see that logistics, diplomacy, weather, government type, etc are the main components of successfull warfare. Again, these can be very dry for many and you often feel that if you got involved in the tactical battles yourselves (they are done for you, not by you) , you could really make a difference. Youd also need an active imagination to envision the battles taking place. Reading books help. CMSF is between the first and the second. Its the type of tactical gaming that involves some chain of command issues. Youd have to have some active interest in various military equipment and willing to accept that you are not the one firing the rifle or the main tank guns. Knowing that the game engine tries to simulate ballistics, suppression etc etc is satisfying for me. Lack of l33tz0r graphics and some will say there is too much micro management, kills it for many. Why not be ALL of these at a hundred percent? Id say CPU cycles, cash, gaming markets and small development team.s In comparison, film documentaries will never be as popular at the box office as the latest CGI flicks, even though docus are closer to reality. Fantasy looks better, has better tempo and follows predictable scriptable patters we generally like. Now with wargaming, Im over the looks department. I need SOME to keep the suspension of disbelief, but im leaning more to the simulation/morale/suppression side. The compromises will exist for a very long time......
  13. I like where the thread is going. I had one play by email game where I lost my marine XO to an ATGM. My whole company didnt have the move option for at least 4 minutes after that. All their morale was set to nervous. Very cool to see such a feature. I suspect most fps players would find it "dumb" and "boring".
  14. No ones playing ping pong anymore? Anyways, starting to upload whats remaining of the battle:
  15. Ok, the thread starter here again.. Misleading title, ill give you that :) Ill tell you what does it for me with regards to CMSF. I know its not obvious to most and even if you knew it wouldnt tickle your fancy so to speak. After reading quite a few non-fiction books and watching videos about war it struck me how resilient humans are in even harsh modern combat environments. I remember reading about vast russian forces trying to take out small bands of chechen fighters during the two recent chechen wars and US marines duking it out in Fallujah during the Iraq war. Even after expending an enormous amount of ammunition of all kinds on some of the hideouts, trenches and buildings, there were on many occasions still survivors in there, willing to duke it out. Humans hug the ground in numerous ways to avoid being shot. The innate instinct to preserve oneself is strong. CMSF, accidently or not, simulates this, even if only on an abstract level. In ARMA you very rarely see this. You never see AI getting themselves into small nooks & crannies in the terrain to preserve themselves. Partly because these terrain features isnt in the game, partly because AI is very confused in general. For human players there is usually very little incentive to gain proper cover, usually because the next respawn is just around the corner. You can always roleplay this to a certain degree with blurred vision or loud noise drowning out everything else, but its never the same as *being suppressed*. Artillery in ARMA is at this time kinda pointless. Consider this; why would you need to put two shells in the same spot(theoretically speaking)? One shell in the game would kill everyone in there (unless hitpoint are used). In real life you would fire those two shells because you factor in random events like the shrapnel missing its target(s) completely. More shells would increase the kill chance within the same spot, not only more shells to cover a larger area. Lets say you put a few 155mm shells on suspected enemy positions. 155mm artillery shells generally have a lethal reach out to about 200m. In CMSF you could experience that one of your men in your squad could take a deadly shrapnel from within that range while the rest remains unharmed. There is some cool randomness in there. I think this is part of what Second meant when he said "paper, rock, scissor". With CMSF there is some randomness at least to the paper rock scissor :) Ever wondered why you would need much ammo in ARMA? I have eventually figured it is for taking out as many enemy soldiers as you can as opposed to actually SUPPRESSING them. Fire & manouver. CMSF simulates this. The mission design in ARMA usually dictates you should take out hordes of enemy in order to justify massive ammo loadouts, while in real life most rounds are used to keep the enemys heads down! Ive seen a thread where someone requests simulating barrel overheating... im all for getting closer to reality but this is one of many request that simply isnt needed yet as the factors involving them isnt properly implemented! (like suppression, fire & manouver, psychology, being pinned down, foxholes, trenches, bunkers..etc). In CMSF you could expend hundreds or thousands of rounds just to suppress suspected enemy positions. Why would one bother to keep the front of a tank facing the enemy in hull down positions in ARMA? An rpg there would do as much good as it would in the rear. In CMSF an M1 is just about impervious to most weapons from the front. AND there is a difference between the upper part of the tank and the lower in terms of armour modelling. Being in defilade actually has value in CMSF. ARMA has hitpoints. CMSF simulates realistic armour modelling and throws in some random events there as well. You can use Javelins to target infantry or even an area target. Havent seen/heard you can do that in ARMA. So called TAC AI in CMSF can be pretty pretty stupid unless you script it well in the mission. But so can the ARMA AI. CMSF AI shines when it defends in urban built up areas. Infantry being shot at in buildings will from time to time retreat into nearby buildings to set up new ambushes. If you dont encircle or flank the village/town at some point you will have a very hard time. In ARMA you can as a single soldier roam the battlefield totally alone. Now this is fair if you are a sniper or part of an elite unit. Generally speaking, in real life, being a grunt on your own as a opposed to being part of a squad, would or should have a psychological impact that says "preserve yourself!". Being in the presence of a squad leader/HQ unit would aid/help you in supressing thoughts of "Im gonna get captured soon" or "eff this, im going home" and actually make you take the fight to the enemy instead. ARMA, you can rambo quite effectively as you want, in CMSF, not so. Again, two different games. Oh, and you can play CMSF turn based if you wish so. Its not purely real time ( I hate calling it an RTS, its way to sloooow). There are things that can be simulated in ARMA, like assymetric victory conditions, but this is inherent in CMSF from the ground up, and I love assymetric unbalanced wargaming, as there rarely is any balanced war in real life. In the end all these little factors add up. No new bling bling Apache chopper addons ,M4 ACOG sights or general expansions would change the way we play this fps game. It would have to go deeper than that. Alright thats the gist of it, without being too much of an anal wargame grognard :)