Jump to content

Freyberg

Members
  • Content Count

    754
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Freyberg last won the day on April 11

Freyberg had the most liked content!

About Freyberg

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm had 20 years of enjoyment from playing the various Combat Mission games, having bought every title and module except 'Afghanistan'. There's a lot to learn, in terms of gameplay, tactics, unit capabilities, and so on - it's endless. Mistakes are messy. That's why it remains such fun. When you want something different - there's a whole world of map, scenario and campaign design (I love making and playing my own QB maps). It's an amazing game - the frustration is part of the challenge. Just buy it
  2. The opposite of fun is boring - easy or hard, good graphics or bad, most other computer games are boring after a while, or even right away.
  3. I don't know what technical glitches it had at first, but I bought the CMSF1 big bundle when it was sold on special. By then it was way behind the WWII games, but, even then and even being much more of a WWII fan, I had great fun with it.
  4. It's certainly accurate in direct fire, but I guess all mortars are...
  5. I guess forests or woods become objectives precisely because they contain enemy troops - they do seem to crop up in the history books from time to time...
  6. I quite like the challenge of the Commonwealth, as well as having an affection for them. They're quite a 'stand-offish' force - they fight quite well outside SMG range, nice accurate rifles, those little 2" mortars that set up in seconds. They feel a little bit WWI-ish sometimes. But they're not strong on close assault. You have to be patient, and in QBs, I give myself plenty of time. For the complete opposite experience, I like playing the Soviets.
  7. I play mostly with British Commonwealth forces of various sorts, who are similar although different. They have less infantry firepower than US infantry, but some nice units and vehicles - recon troops, flame vehicles, Fireflies and similar. I tend to play then quite stealthily on the attack - Firefly is a magnificent long-range sniper - and, yes, they do depend on artillery quite a lot, although in QBs I tend to choose the carrier-based on-map mortars when available, which add a lot of punch to the infantry.
  8. I would like to see: a more active and responsive AI persistent map damage and the ability to play over the same ground in campaigns and even in QBs more contemporary building types and fences in the modern titles
  9. Wonderful It's a great game and more sales will be better for everyone.
  10. I often play on maps, which I make myself, that are bigger than the typical CM map and generally have long sight lines. They're fun, but very challenging - it's much harder to approach a defensive position where the enemy can catch sight of you at 1000+ metres and has good LOF from 500+ metres than it is to attack a position such as the one in the map above.
  11. That was a really good summary - thanks. Also, I like those old training films and that was a really good one, thanks again
  12. Thanks for the response I'll probably run the big installer next time I want to play each game, although currently the new CMFI still has my full attention!
  13. This definitely works - and it makes sense. Walking in the door one-by-one is asking for trouble
×
×
  • Create New...