Jump to content

sburke

Members
  • Content Count

    17,196
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    68

sburke last won the day on June 24

sburke had the most liked content!

About sburke

  • Rank
    CM Junkie
  • Birthday 07/04/1959

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    : Here..... obviously
  • Interests
    uh..... combat mission.

Converted

  • Location
    San Jose, CA
  • Occupation
    Telecommunications

Recent Profile Visitors

5,371 profile views
  1. Yeah just loaded up the first battle in that one and got it right away - in same place I saw previously.
  2. @user1000 to say it just one more time - Got Save? Worth a 1000 words.
  3. My only problem with it is I want it in CMSF! Pretty please!
  4. Define easy? I know how much time I spend looking at customer supplied saves trying to verify what they say is happening, looking at the file itself for anything that might be going on etc.. and only then does it go into a ticket for BF to look at... and it isn't that mysterious or hard. Customer x posts something on forum, one of us asks for a save. We look at the save, if it passes muster we usually reply as such and it goes into the ticket system. I don't think I get what you are finding so hard and what you expect to get different. You speak about this as if it has created an undue burden on you. How many issues have you reported and had to go through a beta tester? Asking as I honestly don't know, but I don't think I have received any.
  5. The onus is on the customer because the customer is reporting WHAT THEY PERCEIVE to be a bug. Sure BF could open an account and allow anyone in the world to post files to it, but I think you can guess how that would work if you'd take a moment to think about it... mayhem. Lots of files, no standard naming, no idea what they are in reference to etc. The real alternative would be to post to a ticketing system...which they do have and it is reserved for the beta testers as we actually comply with what the standards that BF sets versus whatever standard forumite X wants to use. That you can't bothered to have a free account to post a file and send a link makes it very clear about the amount of effort you are willing to commit to the process. If you can't be bothered to do that why would anyone think you'd put anymore effort into a different solution? And I am pretty certain you actually can post a save to the forum. I know I have done it. So what are you going on about again? As to your opinion about what BF needs to do for QA and beta testers etc, you are certainly entitled to an opinion, but unless that is backed with a willingness to pay more for the game so BF could consider additional staff…… well it is highly unlikely that it is going to happen. my dumbass save.btt
  6. any chance of the 10th Mountain making the list?
  7. Or hit alt t by accident and wonder why RPGs are exploding in mid air.....
  8. yeah this is one I have been meaning to get around to
  9. not sure of the process you followed, but keeping up to date on the all in one installer should make this relatively painless. Install and run the activations.....
  10. I don’t think anywhere I suggested just throwing one’s hands into the air. I also don’t think anyone has linked it to pre 4.0 if you have a suggestion that is the case then definitely you need to provide a save. To suggest that the one person who has access to debugging focus on this issue assumes that that is actually their priority and that is frankly not well founded. I personally have not felt this to be game breaking and I am playing across multiple titles including a pbem in CMBN. I think you are assuming from your own viewpoint what should be BF’s priorities and not looking from their viewpoint. As to the baked suggestion, that is just a thought, not anything based in actual testing. It was purely an example that this could be unrelated to what folks have suggested as the issue. Software is complicated , which means thorough testing and validation. I wasn’t suggesting it doesn’t mean fixing, just that the timeline for fixing and the prioritization has to be taken into account. Edit. Your point about bridges is a perfect example. BF has addressed that multiple times and yet yes it still exists to the point I still avoid bridges on my maps. I don’t think it is so much an issue that BF hasn’t looked at but something really basic in the code simply doesn’t like them.
  11. Likely June 2006. Duh you just said that I blame the wine ........ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ramadi_(2006)
  12. Will do....assuming that after I finish this bottle of wine I remember to do this at all. 🍷 kidding, but I did just get in from Japan this morning so it will likely be a day. ...or so.
  13. Not yet but I’m likely to take a look now. I agree it sucks when you start in a cross fire unless that is the intent of the scenario and you are prewarned. There are a couple really good scenarios with the premise. Charge of the Stryker brigade sounds like that might be an intent, but maybe not the best way to do it. It could also be there are multiple AI plans that are crossing in an inopportune way with the reinforcement schedule. Just a guess
  14. I am not sure I understand the logic flow here. Previously you commented on the fact that the TAC AI in CM is really complicated to the point you surely wouldn’t want to do it. Then you suggest BF could easily answer questions relative to the TAC AI. Which is it? what exactly would you have them answer that would change your mindset about “supporting them”? I can tell you now as a beta tester I submit behavior to BF that “looks” wrong with as much hard data (saves and the like) as I can get. Charles then looks at it and builds a patch and says have at it. I do not expect more than that as frankly I wouldn’t understand it. I can only test and see if it seems to have worked. Testing AI is a pain in the butt as you also have to consider unintended consequences which is one reason BF is so slow to address these. As it is none of this has stopped me from playing and dabbling in design. I am honestly pretty tired haranguing folks to stop just harping on behavior to provide saves and not just comment and yet 90% of these threads are completely useless to helping isolate what might be going on. People point to one item, assume that is it and then assume because they guessed at it presto BF should fix it. I am still on the fence on this particular issue simply because something about it seems very specific but it hasn’t been nailed down yet. For example if it turns out it is specific to something baked into a map, which maps? I expect this one is going to be around a bit yet. Nature of software. In a game this complicated if you assume you will get easy fixes and easy answers you are doomed to be disappointed. Yeah it sucks, but as someone who troubleshoots software issues a lot, it is how it works. (And the software I troubleshoot isn’t even this complicated).
  15. Honestly I don't know that CMSF or CMBS have exhibited the behavior. I suspect some of the items in the patch are family specific and whatever tweaks that were added to the TAC AI for CMBN were also added for the modern titles even though I don't know that anyone has specifically cited it in those titles.
×
×
  • Create New...