I've been eyeing this sim for a long time and debating not so much the cost of it (It's around $120 Cdn if you buy it with Tactools) but the amount of time I can afford to put into it. It's one of the more expensive cash outlays for a game but it's actually a bargain if you look at all it contains. Basically just one Jane's book, like warships is $4000. then there's fighting aircraft, another $4000, then there's military vehicles and so on. I figure just the data on modern combat capabilities and ordinance it contains is worth around $25000.00. I'm also deeply impressed wiht its customer list; Lockheed, think tanks, governments, NGOs, Boeing, Raytheon. This is some serious shit. And it's not bullshit. Some of the conventions depicted in photos by participants are serious military personel from various government, USMC, Brazil etc Very impressive
I've been reading it's website and its fora and I've still got a lot of questions about it especially now that it's on sale for just over $40 Cdn.
Logistics. How well does it deal with logistics?
Land warfare. What do you pros think of its land warfare gameplay?
Available scenarios. Are you satisfied with the credibility of the available scenarios? Are there glitches and imbalances that you feel are inauthentic or does it satisfy you intellectually?
Have any of you been able to compare it to DCS's Combined Arms?
I'd appreciate any an all opinions from your various experiences before I commit to invest myself in this.
Thx.
Also I forgot to mention the various options for purchase like regular CMo an CMO PE etc...your opininos on that too.
Go shill your game somewhere else you fricking homosexual
I'm not shilling for anything. butthole. Eat shit.
Well I see you're a discerning Gentlemen of high intellectual value and have succeeded brilliantly in devaluing the value of OP's thread to pure and unadulterated gibberish. To be quite frank, it serves OP right for peddling his steaming pile of afterbirth on this fine forum.
So please excuse my interruption to your highly gifted discourse. Please return to your exchanges of sophisticated eloquence
I've seen this exact same series of posts on several threads by now.
Jannies, do your duty. It's some asshurt Brazilian mad that he got called out and banned from a discord.
You've done a grand job shitting on this piece of shit thread about a shit game. Let's wait until next month when you make another totally useless thread and we can shit all over that too
I tried posting AARs here, but /vst/ doesn't really play or even interested in wargames.
There is a new update that is currently in beta, codenamed "Tiny". It adds a frickton of brand new features as well as some Pro features.
>Logistics
The major logistics aspect that you're going to deal with is organizing tankers for air-to-air refuel.
For ground units, ammo replenishment is a thing and fuel replenishment (and the very concept of fuel for ground units) is a new feature in the beta. The ranges make no sense though, you can replenish fuel while being like 300 m away from the tanker. Might be a beta thing.
>Land warfare
The main issue is that ground unit simulation relies on the terrain map, which just isn't detailed enough for the purpose. The spatial resolution is approximately 100x100 m.
The beta adds actual armor and more granular simulation of weapon mounts, but the game still doesn't even bother to differentiate the orientation of a vehicle in regards to its armor. So ground vs ground scenarios are just meh.
>Available scenarios
The community scenario pack.alone is 550 scenarios. The quality varies, but there is plenty of very well researched ones. The official ones are all pretty good credibility-wise. Older scenarios may not work very well or aren't optimized for the new features, but you aren't going to play through even 2/3 of them in a lifetime anyway.
Thanks for your informed replies. The lack of a proper AI is a dealbreaker frankly. I am disappoint.
There's AI for units and orders, but not for the overarching 'Side' if that makes sense. So you could set up faction relations and rules of engagement on air defenses and they'll shoot at things. And you can set up the AI to send a flight group to go to some waypoints and attack whatever it finds based on its mission, or escort something or etc, and it'll go do that without needing any special prompting or being told to attack specific things.
But you can't, for example, just make some bases and fill them with planes and have the AI automatically start sending out patrols and launching attacks, there's way too much granularity with what you can do with the builder for a generic top-level AI to be able to operate
I know this post is old as frick but I don’t understand why the example you made is not a possibility. I don’t know much about the game in question so call me a moron if you want, but it sounds like there is no high-level management or regional threat analysis, and that it’s basically a one-and-done scripted thing? Seems pretty off-brand for what they are trying to do I guess, to me. I come from a more fun-n-games RTS background, which seems like a whole different world from this, but I have some general knowledge on programming (StarCraft level) RTS AI systems.
In RTS games the starting conditions are known and set in stone, the objective is also known, the available unit types are not that numerous, and the player's progress is tied to macro pacing, which is again well defined. In CMO you can have
- A scenario about a stand-off between a Soviet surface group augmented with strategic bombers on the continent and a US carrier group in the Norwegian Sea in the 80s.
- A scenario about a lone submarine hunting for specific tankers around the Strait of Gibraltar protected by a surface group in 00s.
- A scenario about an Israeli air strike against Arabs in the 60s.
- A scenario about US air strikes against North Vietnam in the 70s.
- A scenario about a complex escalation across the China seas involving various ground, surface, subsurface, and air units from numerous countries with civilian traffic roaming around in the 2020s.
and so on.
All of this involves vastly different tech that requires vastly different tactics and approaches, varied terrain, different objectives, uneven matchings, etc. Even if you let the AI cheat and feed it all the data about the opponent, there is still way too many variables that you'd have to input - and even more variables that AI would have to track after that. So it's only feasible to create AI for a very specific small scale scenario, like I said in the post above yours.
Those are really good points, and I forgot that you do usually have to feed data to a standard RTS AI to make it competent. It sounds far too granular to make a general purpose AI.
Soon. https://www.nsin.mil/events/2021-07-05-ai-command/
>https://www.nsin.mil/events/2021-07-05-ai-command/
Thanks. I was hoping for something along the lines of Ryd Hal Artificial Leader in Arma 2 and 3
https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/216044-hetman-artificial-leader-nr6-edition/?tab=comments#comment-3283148
I'm not going to pull the trigger this sale but I'll be keeping an eye on the development of ai-command.
>Soon
I don't think it's going to be any good. Most AI now these days is focused on conversational skills and it's unreal to a point when you can have that shit write code in any given language and it works - hope my boss doesn't find out. But to play CMO? I imagine the algorithms will be able to create proper missions and even task them to best suited units, but nuances in the use of sensors to get an edge with that large of a database? Will probably take a long time. The major problem is you can train a bot in various things, provided it has enough input data to analyze. This is why language-based bots are so good - people write tons of shit on the internet and the algorithms learned to mimic this pretty well. Like that dude who put 10 bots on /misc/ and anons were flipping out, cause something was off but they couldn't tell. I'm pretty sure that there is also a few bot account posting regularly on /vst/ - if a post is cohesive, doesn't call anyone a gay, presents a balanced opinion or contrary, shits up a nieche thread for a full austismo game few people care about, I'd get suspicious. However, with learning to play CMO on a decent tactical level? What input is the bot gonna get? There is only so many P Gatcomb vids out there, and there is stuff in CMO that people have figured out only recently, like that you can 'clear baffles' with a radar every once in a while and thus increase your chances of detecting stealth. The only real incentive that could make this work is that potentially a bot that can own everyone in CMO is something you can sell to the Navy for top dollar and you can be sure pleb commercial users won't ever see it.
Another issue is that many scenarios present a unique objective and/or environment. AI could work for specific unit groups with a general task like complex air defense systems protecting themselves or a surface task force conducting ASW.
By the way how much is the Pro version? If you can buy it that is. PE? I spent about 20 minutes on their site trying to figure it out and couldn't make head nor tails of it.
Don't think you can, but from what I heard, it's not worth it for a player. It's not really a game, you need to do a ton of tinkering to set everything up and it has multiplayer, but that is the focus. I think it's more like the latest Harpoon (5e is it?) only more clunky, but also more powerful to do shit the Navy is specifically interested in, probably with shit like having a command structure and shit. I've seen Bohemia's VBS, the Polish KTO Rosomak simulator that's based on it I think and the mil version of Steel Beasts, none of that shit is designed to be run at a home PC and I can't imagine how much work one would have to put into making it 'fun'. I assume Command is the same or worse, cause it's the Navy.
CMANO Mil/Gov (the lowest tier) used to be $900 per year a few years back. You can mail them and inquire the price. They won't sell it to you if you're from Russia, China or Iran, but other than that I don't think they're too anal about you being a resident of a NATO/allied country or working for an actual military even if you want to order a higher tier. There is nothing really classified in the Pro version, things that require clearance like actual jamming mechanics and numbers, RCS numbers, etc. are added/programmed by the client's staff. The devs simply ship software and train staff to use it, I don't think they have any kind of a clearance.
As
anon has said, you won't really benefit from it aside from the real-time multiplayer and some small features, which will probably be added to the commercial version in the future. The beta update already adds most of the PE-only features like hypersonics and boost-coast missile physics. The mil/gov and student versions are pretty much the commercial version that you can use professionally without breaking EULA and being chased by their lawyers. The academic version is only useful if you want to fiddle with the data, and the more expensive versions are for militaries, which have sekrit data, programmers, and the need for DIS.
Other anon answered the important stuff so...
>Have any of you been able to compare it to DCS's Combined Arms?
What for? Do the greedy fricks at ED even bother with CA anymore? Bought it practically day one, hoping for decent battlefield simulation, but it turns out it was just their overpriced shitty crutch for a dynamic campaign. CMO is quite accurate when it comes to modeling weapon systems, so also tactics, but lacks in the ground combat aspect, and DCS varies with systems simulation from module to module, but I guess ground warfare fairs better. CMO doesn't have proper AI too, so it will do whatever the mission maker programed it to do and nothing more. As for the database aspect and price comparison to Jane's shit, I heard that argument too, but only from people who were either aspiring writers wanting to be the next Tom Clancy or actual military contractors or active military personel with a security clearance. If you're not either, then that is just your autism speaking. Sure, the database is impressive, considering buying the game only because the info it holds is cheaper than actual professional stuff as a pro argument is kinda out there. Then again nothing wrong with having a hobby. If you are into making hypothetical scenarios, what would it take to break through Moscow's air defense or figuring out strategies to detect stealth aircraft, you'll have a blast. As a game itself, the fun factor depends on the scenario. Watch some youtube tutorials, this will give you an idea how things work and how deep the simulation goes and decide for yourself.
Imagine playing wargames as a job.
https://www.matrixgames.com/job/posting/2022-06-27/wargaming-expert
>Imagine playing wargames as a job.
Many times...
I'm writing shitty fricking code for some of the most insufferable people I've ever met, thanks anon, I just might apply.
It's not really that bad, since you'll only notice this yourself when you have play for a few hundred hours, learned minmax shit and notice the AI doesn't react too well to your cunning strategies. Or you play a shitty designed mission. Most people don't notice, but I'd say it IS a dealbreaker when go deep into designing your own scenarios and try to make a complex one, since that just a lot of work. For simple stuff like say the player has an Akula is tasked with sneaking through the North Atlantic... Well there's a bunch of ships and planes assigned to ASW missions in specific sectors, the SOSUS network and it play fine.
I'm not sure why some anons are so buttmad about this game, but its the same shit every thread.
any way to pirate this
not paying 100+ dolans for this
It's $39 USD right now on Steam summer sale
>buy modern air / naval operations for 60 usd
>they drop the support, moreover you can't buy new campaign dlcs anymore
>buy chains of war for 60 usd
>they drop the support, moreover you can't buy new campaign dlcs anymore
and so on
i'd rather play Harpoon 2 or Harpoon Classic 97
If you had CMANO, you could buy CMO for half the price. All the DLCs you've paid for would be playable.
>If you had CMANO, you could buy CMO for half the price. All the DLCs you've paid for would be playable.
So I have to pay again for something that I already bought. What a fricking grandiose of a deal!
Is there a way to make HC97 work on Win10, beside using VM?
How many buy-to-play wargames and sims do you know that don't charge you for newer versions? Audience of such games is too small to sustain development for many years off the initial sales.
On a scale from 0 to 10 how autistic do you need to be to enjoy this game?