Factory Targets
-
:lol: Someone drunk more than he can take.
Sent from TapaTalk
-
Aw !!! your still throwing your toys out of your pram ?
-
And fabulous !!!
-
Oh your not shouting any more…… progress ?
-
That was some burst attack ha? what a great way to start the day :mrgreen:
-
Sorry for getting him on a roll Yoni… Could not help myself.
-
I get the impression I missed half this conversation… thread seems to have wound up anyway?
-
sweet!! A few few more post and you will get that member status promotion!!!
Cancer in the poopen ?
OH!! He got a promotion :rolleyes:
… I thought they let this guy live a little longer on here than normally… Hahah!
-
hey guys what’s going on in this thread
-
-
oh, one of those
i’ll seriously consider DCS a contender when it gets literally any content past the maybe 20 good missions made in it’s entire lifetime that even resemble a random generated BMS mission
it’s pretty but besides that it’s lackluster at best. half the systems in it barely work. the flight models are “OK” but everything surrounding them is barely there.
-
At the risk of continuing this more than it deserves… BMS is not exactly feature complete either
-
Wow, seems I missed all the fun. No worries, that guy was waaaaaay down at the bottom of my list of concerns. Judging by the PM I got from Mr. Banger, I’m guessing he had some problem with my reply to Frederf.
At the risk of continuing this more than it deserves… BMS is not exactly feature complete either
Most of us understand what you are saying, Blue. Even among the one’s that do not, most of them come to terms with this and enjoy the sim for what it is. That being, a concept ahead of its time for 1998, considering the original bugs and the cost of hardware to even run it at that time.
Now we have BMS 4.33U1 and someone comes along, and after getting the answer to his question from a theater developer (albeit, not the answer he wanted) and other help (whether he wanted it or not), wants to compare it to another sim and judge it sarcastically, and quite frankly, disregarding forum rules. I personally thought he was a goner at post #47. Maybe the European moderators thought he was asking Redshift20 he wanted a cigarette from him.
At any rate, I’m not going to lose any sleep over it. Could have been a good thread. I am on my fourth CP since U1, and I gotta say…It is closer to F4AF in regard to CP, than previous versions of BMS. Being able to control ground troops makes it so much quicker to achieve objectives and cuts down on the stagnant periods where you can’t find any good targets that are left and just waiting for your troops to start moving.
I’d love to hear from anyone who has knocked out bridges in strategic positions, and if they have noticed the same results as I have. I feel like Arty doesn’t believe me on that point. @ Arty -
I am enjoying the hell out of BMS. It brings out the kid in me that wanted to grow up to be a fighter pilot. Unfortunately, only a small percentage of us have the attributes, and I’m not one of them.
Cheers.
-
i don’t generally go after bridges, so it’s hard to say if they would have an effect.
unfortunately, the way korea is laid out means that it’s hard to drop bridges without sabotaging your future self: pretty much anything you can drop will slow you down on the way to pyongyang. i suppose though there is the koksan-pyong’yang route. i don’t think there are any bridges there, so if you funnel all of your forces through that gap, hit the bridges day 1/day2, jam all your forces down that road and then slam the entire combined forces AF down on that corridor’s defenders you could probably speed things up noticeably.
if you actually look at the way the campaign AI moves, it does actually move it’s troops to reinforce areas of weakness. by default it takes a fairly wide spread (at least, after the DMZ is relatively clear) meaning if you drop the bridges (LOTS OF BRIDGES) you could probably prevent it from consolidating it’s forces.
the ground game is actually fairly complex if you look at mission commander. my only complaint is that the AI seems to twiddle it’s thumbs a little, probably a deliberate choice on the part of it’s programmer not to run facefirst into the entire DPRK tank corps.
once it gets on the move, it makes reasonable choices as to where to go and what to capture.
what makes it hard to tell if supply does things, and/or if dropping bridges achieves anything is that korea has so many damn factories and so many damn bridges. it’s also complicated by the fact that many of the DPRK battalions are probably amphibious, which means that they probably don’t need bridges to cross rivers anyway. you could get more conclusive results if there was a theater with far less, but comparatively important bridges (israel)?
besides, korea is a bad example of bridge effects because for about 50~% of the war it’s just the forces on the DMZ shooting each other. whether you hit the bridges or not, the enormously front-loaded DPRK forces are already right next to their targets anyway.
perhaps the only thing i actually wish was different about the campaign was that the red (DPRK) armor was more aggressive. i don’t think i’ve ever seen them actually attack seoul in any great number, especially in this scenario where they absolutely must attack, because every hour they lose several battalions of heavy equipment to the perpetual rain of cluster bombs from what, 15~ squadrons of attackers?
-
What is CP?
I believe you m8 I just want to learn how it is done.
The knowledge on many aspects of falcon is just not there.Sent from TapaTalk
-
-
after a little testing, bridges do work so schniderman isn’t wrong that it can be done. i’m just not sure about korea (so many bridges)
exhibit A:
a BM-21 artillery battalion enroute to this little peninsula. the sole way in are the changyon and taetan bridges. all is well when suddenly!those damn dirty falcons appear and wreck our bridge!
well it’s no big deal, there’s still the taetan bridge.
and then
after a minute or two of thinking about the fact that they’re not going to be able to cross that river, they decide to go to the city and support that instead.
so, i guess if there were the right bridges to hit, and you hit them, you could actually firewall a significant part of the enemy OOB behind a river, or at least force them to cross the country to get across it.
-
@Cik:
so, i guess if there were the right bridges to hit, and you hit them, you could actually firewall a significant part of the enemy OOB behind a river, or at least force them to cross the country to get across it.
It is all about timing. In post #57 and 59 I explain that I put infrastructure sliders to zero so that no bridges get destroyed without my consent. I’m only cutting off reinforcements from the North and I’m waiting until there is a bona fide push to the objective by my ground troops. Again, I’m only hitting what I consider “key” bridges. It may only be one bridge, or a series of bridges depending on the situation.
-
exactly what battalions you can actually stop, and which bridges to hit are up in the air. russians love amphibious vehicles, so a great deal of the enemy line troops might be able to ford the rivers anyway, but it will probably stop at least most of their artillery, many mobile SAMs and AAA.
-
I don’t think it is the 3d object or objective but the value set for this objective. Also the values for units, and maybe the objectives to be deffented. So if bridge is valued 100 and unit 200 might pass from a bridge destroyed that has cost value 150.
In my tests where no such values where set units where passing even through sea.
But who will tell us how we set those values?
Sent from TapaTalk