Jump to content

Rick

Members
  • Posts

    434
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.moosephoto.com

Converted

  • Location
    Dallas, TX, USA
  • Interests
    Wildlife, photography, wargames, military hardware
  • Occupation
    Photographer

Rick's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/3)

0

Reputation

  1. Wow, I expected this to be CMSF in WWII, but it's even better than that. Graphics are improved everywhere, even the interface. Lower situationan awareness for your troops makes it an entirely different game. I had an entire advance stalled by one anti-tank gun, only because I couldn't find him, frustrating, but also means this is an excellent game. Unfortunately, I'm in the midst of replacing my desktop and my laptop can barely handle it. For example it was running along fine, until two more tanks arrived, then it was all over.
  2. This is actually one of the most interesting threads on this forum and I wish more people who deny businesses rights to protect their intellectual property would read. The important part being that with the FB/Google business model there is more going on than what the average customer sees, or there is no way they could be making the huge sums they are. In the end, charging a fair price for use of the intellectual property is probably the best approach for customer and business alike.
  3. Saw this in another thread recently and thought the idea merited it's own thread. The main deficiency I see is there should be an easier way to have vehicles traveling at approximately the same speed is our troops. Maybe this could be accomplished through allowing us more precise control of speed. It would also be cool if we could command a tank to stop when a specific infantry unit does. Something like the infantry unit is on hunt, spots an enemy and stops; the tank doesn't see anything but determines that it should stop too because the infantry does.
  4. I don't know. I don't lose that many warriors, Scimitars OTOH.
  5. Heck, I think I find the British Forces expansion to be the best part of CMSF yet, which is a complete surprise to me.
  6. I'm really enjoying the Brit forces. Only complaint is their squads are so darn small. They go from full force to no longer an effective force really quickly.
  7. No joke about time flying as you get older. It doesn't seem possible that I've been doing this for ten years now. BTW, the screenshot looks fantastic. I'm the type of guy that a gameplay detail would've been a much bigger tease though.
  8. Getting about six missions into USMC campaign. Computer goes to load next scenario, gets to 15% and then stops loading. Vista task manager says CMSF not responding. Any ideas?
  9. This issue is the only thing I've noticed wrong with 1.06. OTOH, it's allowing me to kick some serious butt.
  10. There is little that I miss, but I would say that Hull down command, and the gigantic variety of scenarios. I also miss being better at it. My performance at CMSF has been way worse than earlier games.
  11. I knew there had to be someone commenting on those beautiful screenshots, took me a couple of minutes to find this discussion though. Most anxious to see the list of fixed and tweaked things though.
  12. I thought I didn't see any artillery land. Man he must've been responding to the spotter, certainly wasn't anything else on that hill for him to fear. A couple more shots from his main gun and there probably wouldn't have been anyone left alive on the hill.
  13. So I called in an emergency, point, anti-armor strike and a couple minutes later there's this thick black smoke between the spotter and the tank. Was that artillery smoke? I also learned that T72s are complete murder on infantry, wiping out whole squads in a single shot.
  14. Phillip, hope you didn't think I was insulted, just explaining that I would react differently to the two different situations. My feelings on V1.04 are essentially what I was getting at in my fist post. I find it enjoyable and playable although I don't find it as wowing as CMx1. The thing is though in my mind I don't think that is much a problem with CMSF as it is the fact that CMBO was the first 3d, simultaneous execution, tactical level simulation, that tried to evaluate based on real math and data rather than assigned armor values, and it was pretty for a wargame too. CMSF is an evolutionary advancement on that rather than completely innovative. In other words, CMSF is a good game that had expectations placed upon it that are impossible to live up to. Even though I like CMSF, I really wish BFC had applied their innovation to a completey different sub-genre of wargame. Like see what they could do revamping their air combat games perhaps. Apply their innovation to operational or strategic gaming.
  15. The only problem with that analogy is that for photographers a camera is a tool and a game is well, a game. Although, still not a bad point. One thing causing disagreement is I think there are widely varying opinions on the state of the game at v1.04. I think we can all agree about initial release though. Pro level cameras are kind of a niche market already. That's the main reason they cost so much, the camera companies just can't turn much volume with them.
×
×
  • Create New...