ACF

The swim feature seems to have become a bug - if they can swim, they will. There are few occasions when you need units to swim. Would a better solution just be to make all land classes avoid [deep] water by default, much like OFP IIRC? How about a 'CanSwim' parameter, configurable but defaulting to 0 (even for amphibious vehicles?) and 1 for aircrew and players? If a mission needs swimming, it can be controlled; if it doesn't, the designer is not forced to try to micromanage AI.

All effects were and are mono, aren't they? The engine processes the sound into stereo based on where your virtual ears are.

Is this of any relevance?

The earlier CoDs were more realistic in that you generally played a 'conventional' soldier. In contrast, MoH missions tended to be 'secret agent' storylines.

I never found a girl called 'Sherman' - easily penetrated and inclined to brew up afterwards. Instead, the missus has the initials AA so I get a lot of flak (probably deserved, I should add).

Did you actually look for a girl named after a light machine gun, or were you just lucky? Either way, well done!

So you noticed the ED-209 reference in the copyright statement at the end of the credits to Robocop??

I was going to go with "When somebody is firing at us" As a group commander, I can control the overwatch/fire and movement of the group before contact: I can split them into teams or nominate groups on the fly and move them alternately over sensible bounds. When under effective enemy fire AI should react without input from me and take cover. Units that locate the enemy could/should attempt quick suppression but not hang about in the open. You could say they should start autonomous bounding overwatch to get into cover, but they really should be bounding, not watching. The point is that I shouldn’t have to tell them to stay alive. They should react sensibly, my job is to regain control by getting some or all of them to disengage and move where I want them. A single ‘follow me (quickly and forget everything else)’ command to do this would be a nice extra, in the same vein as a 'take cover (and then return fire if you can)' command. As stated above, the sensible reaction is a factor of distance from the threat - is this or can this be considered?

I really must learn to type faster... It certainly seems a good idea to disassociate stance from behaviour. Will be interesting to see...

If formations are too rigidly enforced the group is going to look too artificial. To counteract the bunching on formation/direction changes, perhaps it would help to: i) delay the response a bit to give a unit more time to 'think' where it needs to be. ii) during this pause, units kneel or lie down, not stand and shuffle. This is especially relevant to those on the inside flank of the turn. From the simulation point of view, confusion and loss of formation is a realistic consequence of formation/direction changes: random wandering gets punished, planning and forethought get rewarded. Regarding the_shadow's comment on units breaking formation: I do wonder if the 'engage at will' logic is a bit too aggressive compared to 'engage'. Am I reading this right: The 'suicidal leader' fix is to make the rest of the group more suicidal? Not quite what I had in mind (Bug 2171 > 2551) but it is an improvement.

Remember that a DR city is three shacks and a shed...

Is it actually a layer, or is it the ground level reference on the prone model being dynamically adjusted? The latter approach might explain why there's no big performance hit. If that is the case, can't the adjustment be applied to standing and crouched AI and vehicles for consistency?

It's curious that the ArmA2 map has its origin at top left when real-world maps have the origin bottom left. I can't honestly remember which way the letters/numbers ran in OFP & ArmA1. I wonder if VBS conforms to the real world? Anyway, here's a simple mnemonic for ArmA2 grid references: ABCD - Across Before Coming Down

Brigadier James Hill summing up after briefing the officers of 3 Parachute Brigadede, 6 Airborne Division on 4 June 1944: "Gentlemen, in spite of your excellent orders and training, do not be daunted if chaos reigns; it undoubtedly will." Short and to the point.

I would recommend trying to get a copy of The Bear Went Over The Mountain by Lester W Grau, it's basically a compilation of Soviet after-action reports from their time. Edit: Soviet military doctrine Just seen the NTC (National Training Centre) photos thread. Dragons at War by Daniel Bolger is an company commander's account of a US infantry-heavy task force's fortnight at the NTC circa 1982. It outlines the theory of Soviet tactics and, better still, the effects of those tactics from the target's point of view. I'd recommend it even more highly than the one above. I'm sure I've seen it at bargain prices on Amazon's Marketplace. A follow-up: The Battle for Hunger Hill follows his battalion's two rotations at the Joint Readiness Training Centre. The focus of the JRTC was/is counter-insurgency in a well-forested environment. It doesn't have the neat attack-defend-withdraw-whatever structure of Dragons at War but it ties in with ArmA2.