Fenris

Just to point out... If you plan to play other people you generally have to stay up to date which means upgrading. -F

Congratulations, looks really impressive. -F

I dislike each base game + modules being separate installs model. Would much prefer the game to be one install with each new base game/theatre upgrading that install so you don't have to worry about v2.0 or v3.0 upgrades to older base games plus all features being available on all fronts when the new titles come out. I'd also like to be able to do some blue on blue QB's pitting western vs Russian forces which a combined game could let you try. Yes yes I understand there's pro and cons to any approach and BF have good reasons for doing what they've done blah blah, not really interested in debating it. I just wanted to participate and this is all I could think of to whine about. Oh, that and there's no CM1 style operations in CM2, I'll never let that dead horse lie, never!! -F

Just put it on CMBN. The distortion bothered me too. Thank you very much. -F

Someone's going to burn their hand holding an MG34 like that! -F

Win7 - yes mostly. IIRC some of the menus are a bit screwy but the core tactical board game part runs fine. -F

Late to the party. Was just discussing this earlier in the week on another board. I tend to agree. Rudel was definitely very good at his job, no argument. But at the same time Goebbels needed heroes and it wouldn't surprise me if kill claims were rushed through the system somewhat to help provide them. In addition it's pretty well known that everyone over claimed, even in good faith. IMO WW2 CAS was great for soft targets, armoured ones not so much. BTW you guys do know that before CM, Chris produced two WW2 tactical air combat games. I've still got them both... Achtung Spitfire - http://www.hotud.org/component/content/article?id=19708 Over the Reich - http://www.hotud.org/component/content/article/46-content/games/simulation/20489-sp-853066880 -F

Sorry to hear about your cat mate. Hope it's not in too much pain. -F

Nice work. What colour is the bow MG? -F

+1 Yes please! -F

All things being relative only you can really answer that question for yourself. Do some research. Don't listen to all these guys though, they're just spambots, part of BFS's very elaborate plan to troll wargaming nerds on the internet. No seriously. -F

Yes CM1 Ops were indeedy fun (as I try to remind everyone whenever I get the chance). Be good if larger map sizes for CM2 can increased via a patch in a couple of years when PC hardware has more grunt. -F

Just checked... And yes there was indeed an SMG platoon of 3 squads with 8 + an MG each in the '44S Grenadier Battalion in CMBB. -F

Best CMRT pic I think I've seen thus far. -F

Not 100% sure it's similar to what I was seeing a while back with my shadows but something simple to try is enabling V-Sync in the graphics options, might help. Edit - actually regarding brown ploughed fields, I get the same effect when zoomed out. Looks very ugly. Sorry I haven't been able to fix that so can't offer help on that one. I think it's to do with the nature of stuff in straight lines in the textures used. Maybe a plain brown earth/dirt texture would fix. Hmmm, might have to try it. -F

Yes I'll confirm CM1 titles run fine for me on Win7 without any tweaking and that CM1 scenarios are perfect inspiration for remaking in CM2. Using CM1 for a template takes some of the leg work out of what is already a fairly arduous process for the non-proficient. I've been very slowly learning to use the editor on FGM Bloody Bocage. .. -F

Neither will do Pac as far as I know. It might be modded into ToW maybe. ToW is and has always been an RTS, CM is a tactical strategy game with a real time mode. As mentioned CM is quite complex. ToW is somewhat less so due to the type of game it is at it's core. I guess one is kind of like a tactical game in 'fun' mode the other 'serious'. One thing that might be a factor, ToW will cost you much less these days than even the base CMBN game not to mention upgrade and add ons which are kind of essential. Definitely try the demo's, will show you whats what. Have fun. It'd be hard to not enjoy either (or both). -F

Too soon?

Greetings from down under. -F

Have mentioned deployment fatigue before. Deployment consists first of splitting the mess of units into some sort order and then deploying them so something like this would be a welcome addition to cut out the first step. +1 -F

It would indeed be nice. I'm slowly building a large map of Chambois. Making something based on real terrain and lots of sunken laneways makes for a lot of unattractive jagged edges. If poss doing angled ground texture edges would be good too. I'm talking about crops and fields losing the zig-zag edges. Not a noticable but a nice to have. -F

I know it irks some to compare CM2 to CM1 but this is yet another feature that should have been brought over. Whilst we're irking how about target next, I use that quite a lot when things get frantic, quicker than checking LOS to targets than using the mouse. -F

Losses... Wonder if that's anywhere near correct. That's from the PKKA site. -F

A compliment! Funny stuff.

The question is too subjective. A definition of 'good' as it pertains to the question would need to be defined. Even then I'd be hard pressed to put good in a tag line against either Stalin or Hitler's regimes (unless it was to describe how good they were at being a-holes to common people). -F