Elmar Bijlsma

Four years lying in wait. Looking for the perfect moment. And then... Swing and a miss! Hi and welcome to the forum!

Good to see the game in action at last. And to hear it! Usually BFC weapon sounds are kinda wimpy, but these weapons sound like the have some oomph.

I'm going to call bull on that. What Ansar al Islam camps were there were outside the power of Saddam in Kurdish controlled areas. The latter were hostile to them too btw but were only in a position to do something about it in 2003. And FWIW Ansar al Islam was not affiliated with AQ. As far as I know there has never been any link with AQ and Iraq that stood up to any scrutiny. Which is probably why this too vanished from the news. And this too seems rather suspect. To b fair it is the first I've heard of it. to what end would there be car bombs in Iraq using Texas plates?

Hi and welcome! There are no matchmaking tools included with the game, still Ye Olde tcp/ip. But there are various forums/clubs that cater to getting opponents. I will let someone more knowledgeable on this recommend some as i never made us of them (or have their links handy) And there is also the Opponent Finder section here on this forum.

That's it, I want a Gulash Kanone! Amen to the M12. The US specializes in boring vehicles, and the one thing that is not boring will not be included? No sir, that will not do. And besides, we were "promised".

That completely skips the possibility that is in fact faulty as a guide to morality. Going Old Testament is a byword for cruelty and slaughter for a reason. Not exactly a source of morality I would want to associate with and it is the basis for the major monotheistic faiths. Going by how few disobedient children are getting their skull smashed in these days, morality seems to persist despite religion, not because of it. Hurray for the "hypocrites", I say.

It is their chief form of compensation for all the hours they put in.

In post #2 he seems to do an entirely fair job explaining the AI thing. He was trying to be helpful to SoD (hah!) and got nothing but grief for it from him. And yet for some the debate leads to fanboism and again betas get mentioned especially. lolwut? *edit* First GeorgeMC was taken to task for not answering the question, and when corrected that this isn't accurate, for answering the question too much?! Are you kidding me?! Except that is not accurate at all. It's different and in some ways less responsive sure. But with the help of a good designer it can do so very much more then the rather basic CMx1 zombie rush. Some people clearly have forgotten CMx1's 8cm mortar crew assaults. Perhaps you baulk at the word AI? Lets cater your pedantry and call it a Programmed Opponent then. And the PO has way more potential then CMx1 "AI".

What way was that? That I didn't like the tone of your post and thus would not go hunt down the relevant post again? What staggering injustice you have suffered, sir. Will you require psychological assistance? The number of the ICC? In post #50 I did look up the answer you were looking for for someone else. I made a point of not doing it for you. Either I really don't like people with a number in their handle or there was a difference in the posts. I generally don't go around bullying people. Well ...not at random. *ahem*

Mr Grumpy here. That is the second time those photos are quoted. They now constitute 50% of this thread. In future just delete the images from the quote, could you? It is a Netiquette thing.

I think I should. All that is indicative of a conversational tone that cannot suddenly insist on courteous and helpful replies. That you got that anyway in two out of three is well above the internet average. Moon has exhaustively replied in this thread and others like it and to me it seemed staggeringly unfair for him to be reproached in that manner.

No, but it is a part of the equation. BFCs stuff needs protecting, and there is always peole who fall foul of that or object to it. BFC should do all they can to please as many of those as they can. But there is a cut off point where it does more harm then good to try and do so. Sure, most people are quite reasonable. Most. Around here people tend to get the reply they deserve, from the forumnites as well as BFC. It's why I like this place, no blanket PR bull. Yup, I've said the exact same thing too, somewhere. (see, I don't exclusivly deal in snarky replies) An additional activation every six months should take care of all reasonable needs of customers yet still protect against mass piracy.

Well damn it Phil (where did Phillip go?) and Vulture. One thing to join in for a reply in triplicate, but did you both have to show me up in the kindness and diligence stakes?!

But this question has already been answered. I'd reproduce it again but your attitude displayed here doesn't really provide me with adequate incentive.

I think Leto means that it's CMBNs scoring that might not be quite up to snuff. While CMx2 has got many new options (that might trip up a tournament scoreline too) it is less adept at giving points for casualties.

Oh, good effort on steering the conversation away from DRM and to something less controversial such as religion.

F2P, now there is a solution to many problems. Like too many über kittehs in QBs. Want to use a kitteh? Pay up!

*cough* Brits will bring 15" and 16".

Not a beta tester, but I reckon Ye Olde 57mm will already severely limit the offensive options of the Kittehs. If they are still such stealthy shooters as in CMx1 then with borg spotting gone they will be real awkward buggers.

But sfhand, out of the two of us I can get the name right. So I win. Securom =/= Online Activation System EA =/= BFC I'm baffled that you think they are similar. And then to drag non related bugs in to the discussion is reaching. That is putting the cart before the horse and you know it! Unlimited installing/activation does contribute to piracy. It may effect some licensed users, maybe, sometimes, and BFC have already indicated they won't be asshats about it. It will also, contrary to what you say, affect pirates. Which I think you'll find is the whole point of the exercise. Which licensed users should care about, because I want BFC to make lots and lots of money to enable them to make better and bigger games. So yeah, DRM is there for us too. I don't like it any more then you do, but that's the reality of it. Well, then for you this DRM could suck and unlicensing a la e-license would be better. A quick peek at Tech Support says there will be plenty who feel different and think it's good riddance. Mind you, the installing and re-installing doesn't use up a license. Can't really hold BFC responsible for the more idiosyncratic uses of their product. Nope. Have you got a conceptual problem with reckognising that your pre-emptive notional problems with the DRM are largely self inflicted? Won't make them suck any less for you, I am sure. But to get so laughably melodramatic about it, yeah, I'll comment on that. You are free to do so. Don't mind me as I point and laugh.

SecuRom, Maxis, EA, bugs? In the first place I don't have a high opinion of the quote on it's own merits but its relevance is nil in this discussion. The rest of us are discussing the pros and cons of the BFC DRM. If there is a grievance against the BFC DRM, please by all means do speak out but do try not to not drag some other company or their DRM in to it with some quote that strikes me as pretty nonsensical. For instance, how is it draconian? A bold claim. 4+1 activation isn't exactly BFCs jackboot on my neck.

I cannot agree that Tigers/Panthers are the must buy items in QBs. Far from it. It's neither the wise thing to do and nor is it, in my experience, common for players to go for the Big Kittehs. I like to have one or two for the pointy end, sure, the rest boring TDs or PzIVs or whatnot for bulk firepower. Not that I don't occasionally sin and get myself a Crack Panther platoon, I am only human, but more often I go entirely without too. In CMx1 you get far better bang for your buck by opting for some low end tanks to back you up. Especially with the British ATGs to whom a Tiger might just as easily fall victim as a PzIV, but the PzIV has some extra buddies to back him up.

I like how they reversed/mirrored/whatever the compass, so the person calling out the bearing is assumed to read the number to the gunner/commander from behind the tank. Btw I kinda figured that it has nothing to do with FOs and indirect fire. Seems a rather impractical way to direct "artillery". I reckon it's more intended so that any accompanying infantry can just shout out the relevant bearing for some 95mm direct fire support.

That question was unclear. For a clearer question and resulting answer: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1241076&postcount=231 Seems clear enough to me. Seems fair enough to me, too.

What Blackcat said. I just can't picture me running out of the licenses. Of course, not everyone is like me. But if BFC changes to, say, 1 spare license extra per 6 months pretty much anybody should be covered. If that is still not enough I too think the problem lies elsewhere then DRM.