Jump to content

lapdog33

Members
  • Posts

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lapdog33

  1. theres a much better name for that. for example you can call it twisting the context of my message and cherry picking sentences in order to present it in different light. but whatever you are the smartest guy on the world, ofcourse after stevey boy. no need to tell me that i just lied about you thinking you are 2nd smartest guy in the world we all know that you are 4th smartest guy on this planet
  2. true brits are different but in my view its safer to jump from BN vanila to CMFI or even better CMBS , you get something much more different when you take into account everything
  3. i do like this game, i probably have 1000 hours in it, but for someone who is not sure what to buy, he shouldnt focus on 1 theatre with modules since changes are far less noticable than those in completely different theatres and most maps do not feel real. as i said ofc unless he is fanatical worshiper of ss or american army in cmbs or russians or whatever, he should go wide instead of trying to build up one game. even if i like the game, maps,bugs, and lack of features/visuals are facts and it all relates to this thread since hes deciding how to approach buying the games. for example if there were vast amounts of details in BN dlcs , had the game less abstracted things which would be able to visualize in those modules, then perhaps they would be a good choice. this way you are just buying more of the same and failing to see whats up in CMBS or FB for example since money is a key factor at the present moment also quoting 7% of my text is NOT a good choice
  4. i was about to write 10 000 suggestions but then i remmebered that steve would implement only 2 per year
  5. modules are worst choice. for example in bn modules you get one hundread quick battle maps u will never play.out of those 100, only 10 are decent. formations are (regardless of historical accruracy which is subject for itself) boring in a way that everything is similar. there are very little unique ambient/atmosphere things in modules to justify those formations being "a must". if u are fanatic about waffen SS or luftwafe, yes buy cmbn modules my recomendation would be to stick to base games , whatever you choose. after 1 month every choice will seem like a bad choice i'd go for cmbs right now, its in good shape after 1.04 patch, then i'd go for cmFB, its winter soon
  6. maps are bad. try playing on maps that have more grass and heavy woods,trees and lots of bushes, difference is noticable. 90% of maps in cmbs are lacking grass/bushes so the cover is considerably reduced. tank crew set to normal would help too try Ambush map, from a scenario, its maybe even best cmbs map in the game. do not bother with QB maps (maybe few work)
  7. would it be probable in real life (on the front) that a typical russian platoon with lets say 3x infantry squads and hq thing be modified into a sort of ad hoc style platoon for untold amount of time like 1x atgm team , 2x inf squads reduced to 60% strenght and 3x Lmg teams + 1 sniper team now i am not trying to ask is this latter combination probable or not , but is the change of that kind of situational formaton or ad hoc style probable. for example if they have deficit of ak 74s and have sufficit of pkps, or they expect large armoured attack , would they consider modifying the platoon by adding 1 or 2 atgm crews/teams. how likely and easy are those transitions/changes and how do the platoon in question interacts with company and battalion hqs/ leaders how does that interact with rigid military formations and desire for clean numbers ,logistics etc. what is more desireable on operational sort of way what does prevail more, robotic paper formations in cmbs qb screen or situational formations, when can we expect to see the former more and when the latter also , when defending what kind of formation defends, for example a battalion needs to send part of itself to a nearby 1km2 village and its outskirts, what composition is likely?
  8. yes, theres just one problem with that we wont have atgm use only toggle , follow vehicles, hull down, shoot and scoot simply because adding that is too hard for bfc and requires actual effort on their part so they just might aswell add non existant spoter in btr/ boost spotting to compensate the vehicle/s . i am sure its much easier than those things you mentioned, i think its perhaps even easier than beating russians under 7 minutes with US army and losing only 2 tanks + 1 immobolized out of 10 , without APS
  9. seems i am ahead 9 hours, so 1am your time is 10 am my time, i think we can arrange something. i could play as early as 8am (11 pm your time)
  10. i am central european time, its 8;22pm here. i duuno if i am 8 hours ahead or behind
  11. Looking for opponentS (more than 1) for cmbs and CMSF pbem,wego Turn based ,real time, all is played 3-10 turns per day
  12. since patch is out ,perhaps there are some people that would like to play some multiplayer battle? since patch is out
  13. why doesnt republican guard/paratroopers have bulletproof or some kind of vest. game takes place in 2008. i think, anyone got some articles/sources that justify this decision by bfc
  14. how much would you ask for it , in Dollars/euros
  15. looking for pbem/wego/real time opponentS (More than 1) . CMBS and CMSF. any skll range will work 2-10turns per day (IF pbem). if we are playing wego then 1/4 of battle in 1 day at least and if we are playing real time then whole battle in 1 day would preffer smaller battles tiny,small or medium (IF CMSF cos theres no quick battles, then we can make a scenario really fast and easy,using existing maps and using our troops,works very well)
  16. looking for opponents for CMBS and CMSF ,any of those 2 will do , not interested in World war 2 atm Game modes: 1) PBEM (4-8 turns/day) 8 is max , 4 minimum. does not need to be that strict, but basically that should be the average 2)WEGO turn based (can save and continue next day/whenever, no need to play whole battle in 1 day). cmon give wego a chance 3)Real time battles (CMSF doesnt have wego) each game mode is fun and works, just change how you approach the battle i'd preffer americans
  17. so if you had a squad leader that comes with a vehicles, he wouldve alerted the crew? i mean is squad leader the best option or any team would do
  18. i heard about that improvisation, will try to use it but isnt bmp3 3man crew (in game it has 2 guys ) yet strykers which have 2 crew members have better spotting
  19. while i was writing that post i did not have 1.04 installed but since i did not see any concrete mentioning of russian optics/spoting i figured nothing changed Literally the main issue with CMBS and maybe only really bad thing that makes me think weather to play CMBS or not is Spoting of Russian APCs , IFVs and MBts ive been playing CMSF today and t62 /72 can immidatelly spot abrams m1a2 or m1 ,or any vehicle that pops in front of it 50-100 meters away (surely t62 doesnt have better optics/observation than t90A/AM?) in CMBS (Pre 1.04 patch) t90 would need 1-3 seconds to spot moving abrams while it was stationary and would usually get rekt by abrams cos abrams have considerably better fire controll system or whatever its called, it can hit before you blink Now after i have installed CMBS 1.04 patch, something changed. i duuno if i am halucinating or not but i ve tested it about 40 times various positions and commands but Abrams tank actually on average, spots slower. lets say its equal, theres room for roullete always. (armour is far superior and fire controll, but thats ok) NOTE: even tho this is a pleasant surprise , i noticed that in CMBS vehicles tend to spot objects 1-4 seconds later (literally even if its sits infront of them, this is regardless of patch) than vehicles in CMSF. did you change anything to improve Russian MBT spoting? i still havent tested IFVS and APCS so i have no idea are russians still high on weed and blindfolded when they need to spot US vehicles
×
×
  • Create New...