-
Posts
537 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Wiggum15
-
-
Just checked my normandy pictures, they look the same.
Then they should provide multiple files that the player can swap according to the environment he plays in.
-
Its a function of the forum i can change my name as often i want...maybe next time if will be sburke15.
-
Stop posting these pictures sburke, thats just spam.
-
Edit: I rate this from the CMFB game manual higher than any UI overhaul, but that´s my personal preference.
page 125
Stock Mod Tags
Note: Ardennes region art is used by default for environmental art, if no mod tags are selected.
[germany] - German environmental art.
[france] - French environmental art.
[holland] - Holland and northern Belgium environmental art.
[autumn] - Autumn environmental art.
[winter] - Winter environmental art.
[snow] - Snow unit and environmental art.
[cold] - Cold environmental art.
[muddy] - Muddy unit and environmental art.
[whitewash] - Adds whitewash camo to vehicles. Whitewash tagged art is used automatically by
the game when the date is January or later, and there is Light Snow or heavier on the ground.
[whitewash snow] - Combination of Whitewash and Snow mod tags.
Mod tags are used by scenario designers to force selection of textures tagged with the
appropriate label. For example, a scenario that has the "[whitewash]" mod tag will always
attempt to use any textures with a file name containing "[whitewash]" (without the quotes)
when the scenario is loaded. Mod tags are also used automatically by the game when certain
conditions are met; for example, if the Region of a scenario is set to Germany, the game will
automatically load textures with the "[germany]" mod tag in the file name.So differend unit artwork in the UI should be no problem...lets see if BFC has done it.
-
LOL i can handle it and the fact I won't be bothered for even $4 shows what I think of it. Nothing against those guys, I really do wish them all the luck and success in the world. There is room in this industry for more than one tactical game company. I just prefer the decisions BF has made over the ones they have made. My choice as a consumer. And I don't go over there spamming their forum with all the things I want that are in CM. That too me is the behavior of a troll and would be disrespectful of them as a developer and to their gaming community. If I wanted their features, I'd play their game. I however want CM features so I play this game. That is called adult behavior.
You just play at being a troll. Wiggum. And why exactly did you change your forum name? It isn't like it doesn't show. All the folks who ignore your posts still show up as ignored, and your cute little Christmas message now show as coming from your new name as do your previous posts. If you meant to fool anyone you failed miserably. But I would think you'd be used to that.
Yeah, you dont care about GTOS, but i care about CM !
-
NV view- Why is this necessary other than being something "nice" to look at?
SOP's and formations- Formations would be nice, but the nice thing about CM is the micromanaging! You are the battalion commander at the same time as being the NCO in the rifle squad at the front.
Road Command- Would be nice I guess for multiple vehicles, but again I can just do this by plotting movement points on a freaking road.
You are getting way too silly now.
NV ?
Because it gives Night combat a realistic feel and adds to the immersion ?
Yeah, plotting multiple movement points on a road and then your vehicle still drives in a stupid way around into a field...
Looks like sburke just cant handle the fact that a game like GTOS exists and is available on Steam for 4$....how sad.
-
GTOS is not less capable, it has a other focus (NO MICRO MANAGEMENT) why cant you understand that ?
Where is your NV view in CMx2 ?
Wehre are your SOP's and formations ?
Where is your "use road" command for vehicles ?
Stop telling lies !
-
GTOS has formations, SOP's...GTOS is not about micro-managing infantry like CMx2 !
Try do that in CMx2... intentionally...
I choose a formation (Line) and stealth behavior and let them move towards the enemy using a depression in the terrain.
Oh, did you notice the NV feature ? Wouldn't that be nice to have in CMBS ?
-
It is interesting that you promote AP games which have no infantry even close to comparable to CMx2 and yet complain about CMx2.... How come AP gets a pass on that? Could it be that you are just trolling... again. Wiggum.
GTOS has advanced infantry options CMx2 can only dream about + does not focus on micro managing your infantry, stop spreading lies.Also i am also demanding a better modelling of infantry combat in the GTOS forums.
Sorry, double post, hate the new forum system...
-
-
So you agree with me i see, lets see what Steve says.
-
In how many damn topics are you going to post the same complaint?
I will make a special thread about my issues with the UI soon.
-
Well I can´t afford a powerfull PC at the moment (as one can see from my sig) and I will not invest into one just for beeing able to see the latest and greatest visual FX in any game.
And we should suffer because of that ?
-
There are a few things... O come on ... you can do better... dont you think thats lazy and disrespectful towards us forum members?
Not as long as you can read my posts for free, wait until i start charging 55$ for it, the quality will go through the roof.
Dude, they are not straight out of Normandy. The game covers more than just December 1944, so you have to expect the unit portraits to be shown with a green background.
And you know for sure they are not just taken from Normandy...WHY exactly ?
And they could not design 2 diffrend sets of portraits ? Would that be too much work or distract them from something else ?
-
Thanks.
As suspected the UI is still not full width and the unit pictures are taken from Normandy, that makes me sad.
-
There are a few things but currently the areas where CMx2 falls short (mostly Infantry and presentation/ UI) keep me away from playing it.
-
Infantry combat is the biggest issue of the engine currently.
An easy fix could be some tweaking in the suppression/spotting/lethality department + the introduction of formations. Sadly BFC is not interested in getting a better infantry simulation at the moment.
-
Not so fast Wiggum15 / Odball15, the game is not out yet. Maybe they'll fix in the mix.
Maybe, but most likely not. Lets see what Steve says about that.
-
Why would it become worse ?
Because BFC say "not doing do any new feature before 2017" or "too much work" ?
-
check out the 2nd post in this thread...
I cant see any pictures there
-
They leave this to Juju.
And you dont think thats lazy and disrespectful towards their customers ?
-
Likely to get fixed soon ?
I posted about that problem 3 years ago and it is still not fixed so forget about "soon".
And today we have PC so powerful to play games like ArmA3, why should fire and smoke give us bad framrates in CMx2 ?
Because the engine cant handle it ? Then its time for a new one.
-
They need to fit what exactly ?
They are streight out from the Normandy game, sorry thats lazy.
And no, BFC is not the "best wargame company",,,why should they be...whats with that constanc praising towards BFC ?
-
Can you please post e few screenshots where the UI is visible ?
Maybe it's me but...
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
sburke you sucessfully derailed this thread which was about CMx2's infantry problems.