Franko

I tried searching, but to no avail. Here's the issue. I notice that quick battle scenarios often "automatically purchase" often picks some really stupid unit mixes. According to the manual, it states on page 52: "Combat Force – the composition of your task force for the quick battle can be selected here, e.g. Infantry only, Armor only, etc.. These choices are based on historical formations, but are additionally balanced for QuickBattles. See “QB Purchase Restrictions” later in this chapter for details. Two additional choices are always available as well: Mix (which means that units of ALL branches are going to be available for the QB, without restrictions), and Random (which means that a Combat Force setting will be randomly selected). Type – this defines the rough composition of the unit based on the previous choices. For example, for an Infantry Branch, the choice could be Heavy Infantry, Medium Infantry or Light Infantry, defining the TO&E as well as available weapons and formations." I have been UNABLE to find the "type" button anywhere! It seems like this was a real thing, but I've been playing the game for years and it seems like this feature (in the bold language, above) simply got dropped from the release (i.e., the game) itself. Am I missing something? It seems like this added feature really would have helped further define purchasing in a way that would make sense for the AI selection of forces, rather than some of the dumb unit mixes I've seen. Has this been explained anywhere?

I tried searching, but to no avail. Here's the issue. I notice that quick battle scenarios often "automatically purchase" often picks some really stupid unit mixes. According to the manual, it states on page 52: "Combat Force – the composition of your task force for the quick battle can be selected here, e.g. Infantry only, Armor only, etc.. These choices are based on historical formations, but are additionally balanced for QuickBattles. See “QB Purchase Restrictions” later in this chapter for details. Two additional choices are always available as well: Mix (which means that units of ALL branches are going to be available for the QB, without restrictions), and Random (which means that a Combat Force setting will be randomly selected). Type – this defines the rough composition of the unit based on the previous choices. For example, for an Infantry Branch, the choice could be Heavy Infantry, Medium Infantry or Light Infantry, defining the TO&E as well as available weapons and formations." I have been UNABLE to find the "type" button anywhere! It seems like this was a real thing, but I've been playing the game for years and it seems like this feature (in the bold language, above) simply got dropped from the release (i.e., the game) itself. Am I missing something? It seems like this added feature really would have helped further define purchasing in a way that would make sense for the AI selection of forces, rather than some of the dumb unit mixes I've seen. Has this been explained anywhere?

I think the big problem, and the most obvious one after more than ten years of these games, is that scenario designers often make maps that are TOO small in relation to the amount of units involved. The real battlefield is largely an empty battlefield. This may take care of the reinforcement problem right there.

I'm with you. I tried again and it hung again. So, it downloads to about 1.33 gb (every time), then slows to a crawl and stops. It drives me crazy. I had a free saturday, but its gone now.

Hilarious. It keeps going up in "time remaining". From 1 hour and 5 minutes remaining. Then 6 minutes. Then, after about five minutes, the time keeps going backwards! i'm re-uploading a download, apparently.

I'm on my seventh attempt or so on a brand new mac. It starts out great, and then it hangs around 50% through it (according to the bar), and then sort of slows down to 350 k/ps or so. This is frustrating. I'm not sure what to do.

Agreed. Plus, Stewart wasn't actually interviewing the REAL author. O'Reilly doesn't write anything. He uses his name to sell his books to loudmouth redneck idiots.

Also, the attacker rarely gets much setup room. In reality, there is much more depth to the attacker's zone. In this video, you can see that there's a lot going on behind the rifleman's attack position. F

Excellent vid, thanks. Now I'm inspired to do a battalion level engagement!

This sounds silly, but old period tactics manuals are helpful. The best phrase, and completely true and useful: "Find 'em, fix 'em, flank 'em, finish 'em."

I'm fed up with the criticism of Battlefront's "business model". The only thing we should be concerned with is whether the price is fair on exchange for what we receive. So far, they've offered a good game at modest prices. Now stop wetting the bed and leave these guys alone. These guys have run Battlefront for at least 15 years. Most of the whiners have only run their mouths.

All good news. I respect the fact that you continually improve your product. And good job predicting the inevitable idiot.

For the record, some of us old-timers are still here.

It's been awhile since I checked on this thread. Nope.

49. And I happy there are so many "mature" individuals out there. Anyone want to do a h2h? Drop me a line. Email preferred, but real time ok.

By the way, the Batman slapping Robin post said it all.

No, Battlefront can pay their payroll and personal bills with good will. Please, somebody donkey-punch him. I don't want to violate the TOS.

I downloaded your new 2.0 upgrade and gave it a whirl. The shaders look fantastic. I believe the upgrade is worth the price and the number of new features is welcome. I've been a fan of yours for 12 years and will remain so. Best wishes always. F

Finally! Yay!

What I take from all this is that someone got his stummel smoked by a Churchill.

There is no justifiable hatred for SPR: it remains a war movie classic. Perhaps the best in in the genre. Yes, there are little details that are imperfect (A Tiger? Near the 101st AO? No Way!), but they got so much right, according to VETERANS, that its still the gold standard by which other war movies are measured.

Great reply., JonS. Very helpful.

This is only marginally less lame than break-dance fighting.

Do we have a non-sarcastic answer to the original question?

This never gets old to me, but I'll say it again: well done, Battlefront.