Elmar Bijlsma

Do the Syrians still use IL-2s and there like!?! :eek: btw, we have a seperate CMx2 forum section now. Go complain about it there, you worthless person. </font>

Do the Syrians still use IL-2s and there like!?! With the US air force being overpowered the way they are that will not be any fun unless BFC unrealisticly overpower 1944 Luftwaffe. Which wouls suxxor. Thats it, I will not be buying the CMx2 ww2 game either! btw, we have a seperate CMx2 forum section now. Go complain about it there, you worthless person.

Since I am asking silly questions, why stop at just one? How will artillery be handled? For me and my Allied General campaign system these confronted me with several headaches in the translation from operational to tactical, though the rigid scale of CMC would solve most I guess. If I have, say Soviet 76mm field artillery can I use them in multiple roles? I assume that if they are on the field in a generated CMBB battle CMC would disqualify them from lending a hand with indirect fire at that point right? But if I have 76mm guns away from the action I could task them to lend a FO to the battle? But next battle I could use them as on board guns again, right? How will big guns be handled? All fine and dandy giving FOs when they lend fire support but how will I handle them if these big guns (not included in CMBB on map) get caught up in a battle should they stray too close to the action, how will I be able to destroy them during that battle using my on map forces? I would guess counter battery fire is calculated by the CMC engine on its own. But if my tanks and infantry stumble into a battle where heavy artillery is defended by a few enemy units how will that generated battle be portrayed? Lastly (for now), FOs come on the tactical map representing fixed battery sizes (2,4 and 6 usually) how would CMC deal with depleted artillery units? If there is 1 gun left but the minimum size FO for that type is 4, will its ammo count be reduced to 1/4 or or is some special trickery involved? Quick, answer me ASAP, the question mark on my keyboard is wearing out!!!

In my my home made Allied General v CMAK/CMBB campaigns aircraft feature quite largely because of the way the Allied General campain insists on having them around but I could not find them in any CMC screenies. I hope you guys found some way of including them in CMC because in big battles it can be quite exciting to have aircraft of one side or both roaming the skies looking for ground stuff to shoot up. It does open up a can of worms though. How would air units be structured and how would the player utilize them and destroy them other then relying on AA on the CMBB map. Some special combat calculations for air to air combat would be required on the operational level. I realize that all that might not be worth while given the relatively marginal influence of airpower on the tactical battle field. I just hope it has not been disgarded lightly as it adds a nice extra layer to the tactical battles and might just be that extra little spice in the operational game too. Any word on this?

Oh, just to add I am very happy with this announcement. I have been doing something like this with the Allied General engine manually. It looks like I might get to finish my CMAK run with it and can then safely put this hap-hazard half-assed botch job to bed and go play CMC. Huzzah!

READ THE FAQ! Madmatt </font>

Since Steve told us that even with modules CMx2 will not be CMBO-like in scope, what are the odds of BFC adding the King Tiger, Cromwells, Pershing et all in a patch so we can go nuts with CMC Westfront? This because after CMBB/CMAK CMBO is fun and all but doesnt really do it for me any more simulation wise. *runs for cover*

Turns are now 15 seconds. This in order to simulate the the typical duration of CNN combat footage. For real.

I dont think many people have come round. I just think most sensible ones realize that they are not going to talk Steve and Charles out of this setting so instead of harping on about it here they take comfort in the fact that they will not be forced to purchase it at gunpoint. I still cry myself to sleep though.

Phah! Over in the GF we are once again discussing the awesomeness of X-COM( released in 1994). Oh, if only BFC and Firaxis could sit around the table and agree to make CM:Enemy Unknown together. I might never see daylight again! :eek:

So... how about extending that deadline? Seems we might need to make this one last. /

I think certain staffers at CGSC should re-acquaint themselves with the possible teaching aid that is CMAK.

Gosh Other Means, do you think the other participants in this thread will return here to acknowledge and admire our superior deductive skills?

Gosh, I am taken totally aback by the setting of the first game. I will give by full opinion when I have time to mull it over. My initial reaction? YUK!

*refresh* *refresh* *refresh* Oooook! *refresh*

Thank you Mr.Dorosh for the kind offer allowing me to not use such a redundant feature. What ever would have become of me if I was tempted, nay, forced to use it! I can only reciprocate in kind: You are free to not use the product of the alleged 20 lines of code should they not be allocated to a screen capture function. No blastwaves for you, Mr Dorosh.

Considering it is a near useless feature used by nearly none of the customers... Yes, some boggling of minds would definitely be involved.

You guys are nuts! Even for a relatively simple feature (and I do not think you would want to say that within earshot of Charles) it would be a mind boggling waste of resources. Keep in mind that we here form the hard core of users, most others would never even dream of taking a screenie. By Hades, most of us only do so for ROW AARs and even then it is a minority who do so, I think. Programming time is limited so to include this something would need to get be dropped from the `to do` list. That might be blastwaves you guys are bumping off! :mad: :mad: :mad: And all this for a feature that is already possible with free software. Simply because you guys are too lazy to use Irfanview? Again:

why would BFC include a feature that is available for free elsewhere? You are aware Charles will code in the screen capture function with time originally allocated to implementing the accurate Canadian OOBs?

Game against mPisi back underway. Mail sent to JohnO to find out how to proceed, that game not much beyond the opening stage yet.

I do. Naming yourself after an SS dude rarely endears you to people.

Alright, you asked for more and with quantity over quality it is not my fault if they suck.

Tsssk. Kittengrenadier? Look at his equipment! If there is a clear example of the Fallschirm Kitten it is this picture.

That is indeed a great feature of PIATs. And they are by now means bad at what they do. But what they do is far too limited to rely on to deal with tanks. What happens more frequently instead of getting multiple shots off is the Out of Range message on my targetting cursor. PIATs are my usefull little buggers IF the enemy obliges. Which is what I was trying to say but didn`t.

You guys underestimate the power of copy protection against the average consumer. This will no doubt erode over time as more people will become more computer savvy. But even then it will still be well worth doing. In the words of HL Mencken: Basic plain jane copy protection, nothing fancy that might PO the ligitimate customer, is what is called for.