IceFire

If they are not making a mission about Irak, then why must we use chems? Not only that, these days chemical weapons are almost useless against a sophisticated trained army. I heard an Army artillery officer talk about the uselesness of chems against any trained army today. Â He said any military commander would rather just use conventional explosive rounds instead of chem. Â Chemical disperses too quickly, does little or no structural damage. Â And most troops are too well prepared for them these days. Chemicals used by Saddam are only useful for stifling rebels and killing civilians, and causing fear and chaos in general among peasants and resisters. Actually, even with the best equitment against chems, chances of surviving a gas attack is below 1%. Where did you hear that? I have heard military commanders say that chemical weapons are virtually useless on the battlefield today. Primarily because most militaries are too well prepared for them. I'm just going on what I heard. And it was being told by top US military officials on telivision.

Actually having the ability to draw freehand on maps was MY idea originally. It was intended to help the player make quick in game notes about enemy movement and positions during "recon" or before attacks. The player would be able to draw out where the enemy is, plan out where he wants to place your his own men, draw out boundaries, and plan/draw out a path to move ... etc

Not everything that is in real life would be fun in the game just to make it realistic. For example using stealth bombers to bomb little targets. That would be boring. You just would see a green screen with a map with a cross hair and you could click when you want to release the bomb. Using chemicals in this game wouln't really be any fun.

Ok, fine.

If they are not making a mission about Irak, then why must we use chems? Not only that, these days chemical weapons are almost useless against a sophisticated trained army. I heard an Army artillery officer talk about the uselesness of chems against any trained army today. He said any military commander would rather just use conventional explosive rounds instead of chem. Chemical disperses too quickly, does little or no structural damage. And most troops are too well prepared for them these days. Chemicals used by Saddam are only useful for stifling rebels and killing civilians, and causing fear and chaos in general among peasants and resisters.

OMG I just went into it looking for the FONT option you said and I did something, I don't know what, and now everything is back to normal. THANKS. Even though I don't know what happened!

OMG I just went into it looking for the FONT option you said and I did something, I don't know what, and now everything is back to normal. THANKS. Even though I don't know what happened!

No no, I think I am in normal mode. It just won't go back to the way it was.

No no, I think I am in normal mode. It just won't go back to the way it was.

Also, US Special Operations Units have played a part in pretty much every US military involvment since WW2, so I think there will be SOME spec op missions in OPF2.

Hmm, I don't know about what you played. But in CWC there was only Army. No Navy, no Air Force, no Marine Corps. And yes, Sam the pilot was an Army Pilot I believe.

For one, how are chemical weapons used? I don't think there are like any chemical hand grenades you can just throw over a hill. I believe that most of the time they are fired at enemy troops using artillery cannons or dropped by planes. So first they would have to develop artillery in OPF2, or bombers. I would like to see suppressive fire added to the game first.

Ahh! I tried it, and it wouln't let me drag the little slider across to more. It would just do nothing. I kept trying to click it and drag it across, but the little nob wouln't move!

Ahh! I tried it, and it wouln't let me drag the little slider across to more. It would just do nothing. I kept trying to click it and drag it across, but the little nob wouln't move!

yup here is video of the ambassador... Real player: broadband Not watched this video yet, but lets say I do believe you: This is a dangerous route, to merge government with religious beliefs or specific religious groups. Â Firstly it will strengthen what you call anti-simetic views, and can be a cause of long term conflict over beliefs rather than purely factual matters. Â When you have a government serve a Religion, peopel start having a hard time seperating the people, the government, and the religion. Â And you get this big red bullseye painted on everyone in all the above. Â Well Isreal was created for the Jews. Jews are people who are Jewish. Therefore the state of Isreal is for a certain religion.

I think all that needs to be said has been said. Topic Closed.

What if OPF2 had a campaign about the US war on drugs in south america. It would be interesting to see a campaign where you do guerrila warfare against south american drug cartels, or even colombias FARC military. Or what about this.. .. the war against Cuba, the bay of pigs .. or something like that. It would be completely untouched territory!

Thanks, but it wouln't REALLY be turn based, but kinda. Basically it would work like this. You(general) would choose where you want to move troops and what other actions you want to take during the next mission. Then you would get to choose who you want to play during the next turn. Any other action that you wanted to do on that turn would not be witnessed by you. You would hear about it when the mission is over.

Ok, after not playing this game after like 10 months, I turn on the game and start playing again after the last mission where I left off. I was on the mission "Recon", and just completed it. Well, after I beat the mission recon, it moved me on to the next mission. I started the next mission, some tank mission and decided to end it before I really did anything in it and go to bed instead. So when I exited the mission, I noticed in my campaign book that it said Recon was the last mission that I was on, with the pic of the Black Op, and after that there was a "continue" link with the picture of Col Blake with the jeep. No picture of my new tank mission name. I thought that was odd. So I tried to play the new mission by clicking on "continue" and it put me back where I was in the middle of the mission. Not at the briefing or at the beginning even! Boy I was PISSED! I didn't even want to play that mission at the time. I just finished up Recon and wanted to go to bed. So now I tried it again today, and this time I tried everything to make it go back, by hitting retry and all that. I could start over, but not at the breifing, and eventually the game automatically deleted that mission entirely and now I have to replay "Recon" in order to do it again. Now I am REALLY PISSED! It has never done this before and it is enough to make me ... well, I am not going to delete this game just yet. But I am mad! I was so relieved when I finished Recon without firing a shot. It is a unique and fun mission, but I DO NOT want to have to play it over at the time. I just want to finish up the campaign and start on Red Hammer. I have not even started Resistence yet! Can someone please tell me what is wrong? I have version 1.90 I think. thanks

It worked!

Ok, I renamed and deleted the files. But when I went into the game and tried the campaign cheat, it activated the wrong campaign. So when I leave the game and go to the campaign book, my Resistence campaign is fulled up, but I am still at the training portion of my CWC campaign. Now I gotta activate the right campaign and clear out the Resistence one. How do I do that?

I have an idea as how to design a dynamic campaign. The player would have to act as both General, Soldier, and basically the general designer of the whole campaign. Basically at the beginning of the game, the player would be informed as to how many total troops, tanks, choppers, crew, special operations units, boats, and other vehicles he has available for total for the entire campaign, and where on the island(or wherever) they are positioned. And a figure of how many units the enemy has and where on the island they are. Before the first mission, the player would have to decide what to do first. He would most likely spot the closest and most vulnerable, or perhaps most valuable enemy defense and decide how to attack it. He would have to determine how much of his forces(troops, tanks etc) to send in and in a large scale .. what troop/tank/ chopper formation. That meaning where will the different platoons attack from, from where and when will the tanks and choppers strike. Once all the major planning for the mission is complete, the player would then actually start the mission. In the mission, the player would have the opportunity to play one of the squad leaders in the battle. How well the mission goes would depend on how well he planned it out. Did he use choppers? Are there enemy Anti Air systems in the area? After that mission, he would recieve 2 mission complete reports. One for the player as the soldier who was fighting, and one for player as the general who planned out the mission. This would be something like how many of his troops died, how many are left in the area, how many enemies were killed. He would also be updated if the enemy is reported to be planning a counter attack or if during the mission YOU played the enemy already attacked another base of yours, and in how much troop strength the enemy might be planning to use etc... Then the player would plan out what he wants to do next. Where to move more troops, again like before the first mission. In the end it would be up to the player to use what he has wisely to acheive the objective and win the game. Basically this would work like a turn based strategy game, something like "Lords of the realm". But using a large zoomable map to plan out the "mission" portions of the game where the action actually take place. Nothing happens except for during the missions when the player is actually out in the field. The game AI would actually have to determine how to react to your own actions. It would have to calculate and "plan agianst the player". It would plan out it's own actions during the same time the player is planning out his own. I think this form of a game would have alot of possibility. The actual missions would still be from the same perspective as OPF is now. You would play as the same squad leader or tank/chopper man as you can now. But you would have the opportunity to plan out the whole campaign and how and where you want to attack, and using which forces. The bad part about this whole system is that there could not be alot of scripted/cut scene moments in a game like this. What do you all think?

Ok, can you atleast tell me how to rename the 1981.pbo file and how to delete all those other files without ruining anything?

I really don't know because I have never even downloaded a mod yet. There are so many good mods and possibilities for this game, or so I have heard. But I don't want to download any until I have completed Red Hammer and Resistence. I started on Red Hammer several months ago, but stopped after I accidentially deleted my OPF GOTY game from the comp. Now I want to finish the CWC campaign before I even start on Red Hammer again. I still have yet to start on Resistence. Oh well. So again, I have no idea.

I really don't know because I have never even downloaded a mod yet. There are so many good mods and possibilities for this game, or so I have heard. But I don't want to download any until I have completed Red Hammer and Resistence. I started on Red Hammer several months ago, but stopped after I accidentially deleted my OPF GOTY game from the comp. Now I want to finish the CWC campaign before I even start on Red Hammer again. I still have yet to start on Resistence. Oh well. So again, I have no idea.