Jump to content

Mattis

Members
  • Content Count

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Mattis last won the day on December 14 2018

Mattis had the most liked content!

About Mattis

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Mattis

    CMSF2 v2.01 Released!

    Yes thats what CMSF1 assumed. But players wished for Syrian air to be added to play out those hypothetical scenarios and with Black Sea getting many of these Russian air assets and Igla/Stinger done they´ve probably decided to add them which was a fantastic idea. So Syrian air assets and anti-air assets were proposed as features of the CMSF2 update. Now we presented with a half-baked solution that many blue factions suddenly don´t get AA cababilites creating uneccessary-stupid quick battle imbalances. Also aren´t there more important issues that needed to be adressed with a patch in CMSF2? But great to see that they damn sure got that time to remove features after release. Of all reported issues they´ve decided it is of uttermost importance to remove British Stingers so quick battle players are screwed over even more. Thank you Battlefront for patching features out of my game after I purchased them. Thank you for granting me that ability to get pounded by Syrian Air Force without having any defense while they can shoot down my aircraft, this realism...
  2. Mattis

    Nato with no AA capabilities

    Looks like that the 2.01 patch even punches quick battle players into the face by removing AA capabilities from the British. You buy CMSF2 and instead of expanding it, they proceed to remove features from it post-release because of stubborn TOE reasons that have nothing to do with reality. Great stuff...
  3. Mattis

    CMSF2 v2.01 Released!

    What the heck is a promotional page from 2019 of the UK army proving? The British Army definitely had Stinger stockpiles in 08 which are scheduled to be replaced by Starstreak since the late 90´s . However 2001 the UK Army again received Stingers from a Raytheon contract issued by the US: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/4499/greece%2C-italy%2C-uk-buy-stinger-sams-(feb.-20).html But more important this narrowminded TOE-whoring is destroying more realism than creating it. I got the upgrade because I love the fact that Syria receives air support and naturally believed that BF at least would equip all blue nations with the Stinger. Now we have three blue nations which ABSOLUTELY can not defend themselves against Syrian Air in quick battle. How is that realistic? The other air defense assets are not modelled in CMSF2 so at least give us the goddamn Stinger, and even if the countries wouldn´t have them in stockpile (they do) they would get them from the allies prior to the invasion of course. I mean what is this supposed to achieve? Why don´t change the website description to: "Enjoy the most realistic ground warfare simulation where Syrian AA will shoot down your Eurofighters and Apaches but as a Dutch, British or Canadian you have to helplessly watch how rusty SU-22 will blow your forces into oblivion" with a disclaimer beneath it "make some houserules with your Syrian buddy so he can´t use the shiny new air toys which probably where the reason why he purchased this goddamn update in the first place." Absolutely nobody asked for the removal but almost all asked for the EXACT THE OPPOSITE: Stinger´s addition to NL and CAN forces to allow all quick battle players to enjoy an at least somewhat believeable scenario where OPFOR has air. What´s next? Patch 1.02 Hotfix: Removal of the BMP-3 because there is no Syrian TOE list that states its existence? We now really considering about keeping a unpatched version around to allow for unrestricted Syria vs British multiplayer quick battles. Thanks for this early april fool´s joke. Please add the Stinger team to all blue nations everything else is just stupid.
  4. Mattis

    CMSF2 v2.01 Released!

    To the other mentioned observations which are probably unintentional I ask myself why one would intentionally remove the Stinger teams from the British Army? British (and the three representatives of the NATO module) are Fim-92 operators and now we have another army without AA capability which requires to play MP with silly house rules. Patches are supposed to add/fix features not to remove them. Please allow all blue factions to use Stinger teams.
  5. Mattis

    Nato with no AA capabilities

    The Germans atleast have a Stinger team in the special team section in the editor but not in any formation (and thus not in QB either likely). NL and CN look like they don´t have them displayed at all, nowhere. Would be great to see this getting a patch.
  6. CMSF1 module install never required a base game license but just a base game install and of course the module key. This one dollar patch was basically for people that didn´t wanted to get any of the modules but still wanted to get continous updates on their base game that they had bought from retailers back then and which didn´t come with licenses. However do not worry there were plenty of people that had the similar scenario (CMSF1 retail base without license + CMSF1 module licenses + CMSF2 big bundle upgrade). The helpddesk will definitely help you out on that 😉.
  7. Pretty sure that with the helpdesk you´ll able to track down the purchase including the license.
  8. Mattis

    Flickering shadows

    You´re definitely not the only one. Especially a low sun can cause distorted shadows but AFAIK there isn´t much you can do.
  9. You can use any decal mod and interchange them between all CM games that come with hit decals (CMSF1 and CMA don´t have hit decals).
  10. There are people that love to pretend that they are speaking for the community but they aren´t, it isn´t the truth. There are a few that are extremely vocal but there are much more people playing CM and contributing to it for decades which you don´t see post here occasionaly, or let alone have a forum account. Most people definitely would like to see your project to happen. From where I do know it? Because most wargamers aren´t that malicious bigoted and outright stupid that they would crap onto one´s idea to provide free content just because it isn´t suiting exactly their reactionary preferences Now regarding these triggered "watcha out into whose face ya getting here" guys. They are just targets and it is really itching to give them some lessons😅. But you already adressed everything important like a smart person would do. And your thread deserves better than getting riddled with flame wars. We definitely could use more of your decent kind around here. Best success for your project. Amen
  11. Ridaz stated that he is focused on completing the story right now and at the moment does not own CMSF2 so perhaps keep it easy on that artillery barrage of questions. Take your time with this idea when you get your hands on CMSF2. If it takes you a month, a year, a century, thats fine, no rush. The CM community is happy for everyone considering to get into campaign making business. And while getting feedback on your idea is always smart remember don´t let yourself put under pressure by that feedback as it may not represent what everybody thinks and sometimes can derail into a "do it like I would do it". Keeping the speciality of units in mind is definitely important but you don´t need to follow them by the book. Battlefront itself doesn´t, in order to provide us with challenges and new situations. Most official campaigns and missions don´t follow this rule by the book and task specific elements of your force with objectives and pitch you against opposition a real commander never would consider to do. The CM games come with such a big variety of forces and so much room for hypothetical scenarios it would be a shame to limit your own ideas stoically to force those super green TOE and MOS checkmarks. But from what I am reading here you definitely got something promising going on there.
  12. It was someone else then still doesn´t change the fact that his post in the provided context makes absolutely no sense.
  13. And some need "they are definitely not the brightest bulbs in the box" refreshers. He once told me to name myself St. Mattis so I named him St. . Its some sort if inside-joke but every intelligent person could guess it by context of the last two posts between us but this requires what? Exactly, proper reading and not just casually pick up a one-liner in the middle of a thread while watching a funny sloth fail compilation but then decide to jump onto it and make yourself look like a sloth. If you have absolutely no clue what is going on its simply better to stay away from that keyboard. Also keep in mind reading->thinking->writing and not the opposite way. Amen.
  14. Correct all the new retreating behaviour. For being one that is still taught in the secret art of proper reading you´re hereby granted the title. St. Squarehead from now on. Amen
×