Elmar Bijlsma

Wiki says the Brits put together 4 Sherman Crocs for the US 2nd Armored Div. Probably safe to say we won't be seeing those in CM:N. It suggests the Americans had no dedicated FT tanks of their own. AFAIK they were only issuing there own Sherman "Croc" to a Pacific bound unit late in '44.

As if! http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=89607

Hardly "very rare". Several hundred of the beasties, though almost exclusively in the 79th Armoured Division. And I do believe that the Americans so frequently had Croc support attached that a good case can be made for the Croc to be in the original title instead of the British module.

TBH, I'm less worried about the combat engine as I am about the game built around it. Stuff like Campaigns and QBs could take this game so much further. Even such a thing as kill-stats tracking would help a lot. There just is something satisfying about inspecting the units to look at who killed what. I hope the latter hasn't fallen by the wayside amid slipping ETAs. I'm a bit worried about the QBs too, most especially the purchasing. With a points system already excluded, I fear a system too clever for it's own good. Just let the user fool around with his force. Anyway, point being, the engine could be the greatest thing ever, the game might still be disappointing.

You might want to try turning anti-alliasing off. Oh, and welcome! Make yourself at home.

Or to bump it.

Unsurprisingly, that goalpost has been moved. The new ETA is... *drumroll* ... some time later. Spring-ish. Hopefully. It's a bit of tradition, that.

It was always a soft limit. Anyway, with the new forum that 300 limit is more tradition then anything.

Be sure to burn a disc containing the Marines (or any other) installation files. That download will only be available for one year. And it's just sensible to make your own backup in any case.

But Germany had a serious problem with their POL reservesbefore the war, eventually unable to meet the needs of the armed forces mid war even with synthetic fuel production. Imagine how much worse it would've been if they'd been fully mechanized. Also, foraging for something for the horses to eat was probably more rewarding then doing the same for fuel. Even in Libya.

Horses run on a more readily available fuel then lorries. The Germans weren't just being old fashioned, it was actually rather clever of them.

Well... Clavicula_Nox might be okay for now, as long as he does not go around showing a picture of his girlfriend, or make known his plans for when gets out of the army.

It's "guter schuss" and does indeed mean good shot.

Steve: But shouldn't it be possible to throw a few shells in the middle of a wooded area, even without TRPs?

*edit* Replied to an old post due to navigational error. Deleted as irrelevant.

Nah, not quite a bug. Terrain damage doesn't carry over because for each campaign battle a new map is used. Even if that new map is the same as the old. So damage doesn't carry over. It's a feature I sure would like to see, being a pre-requisite to get something like the old Operations back.

Never heard of Horse and Musket either. So no help there. I think BFC has not too long ago commented that they aren't likely to develop a musket age title. It's probably their prejudice against horses. They've got a nice modern combat engine, so why start over while their is a veritable clamour for all sorts of conflicts in the era that their current engine is designed to handle. AGEOD have a Frederick the Great game due out soon. I'd definitely check that out if I were you. As for the question of downloaded gamefiles, typically the downloaded file of such a nature as to allow burning on a disc for later use, so should be portable. But that's the installation files, be sure to check out any DRM that might not be so accommodating. Quite a few seem to assume some sort of internet, at least once or at startup.

Yeah, but that is both literally and figuratively a pretty marginal ability. For fear of gamey area fire BFC have nerfed artillery to pretty much hit only where you can see. It's a decision I very much do not agree with.

Actually CMAK didn't feature King Tigers either. Someone got a little too enthusiastic with that line.

1) I rather wouldn't see casualty treated be very much expanded upon. I've got enough to worry about. It's at a good level for the tactical sim. 2) BFC have never beenon special force. And I kinda agree. Bang for your buck development wise, there can be better units to spend time on. 3) I see no reason why uniform diversity (I know!) would not continue to exist. 4) I'm not sure I follow. You mean racial couring. I'd expect most participants to be of European decent. In the grand scheme of things non european frontline soldiers were very rare. 5) Females, to what purpose? Just not a big feature of a WW2 battlefield. I'd be pissed to hear I'd be missing out on my Crusader AA tank because someone had to model boobs instead. 6) On this I agree. I'd be very nice to have casualties be more varied in posture. Not important perhaps, but nice.

I did no such thing. Read again. I made the observation about the process of radicalisation observed among the more deranged. I was NOT making a direct comparison between the bashers and Jihadis. Being negative towards CMSF/BFC is not a qualifier for being in the category of aforementioned nutters. It takes a whole lot more then being being critical. I've read GS for about a year or so now and have been in "discussion" with most of these same people over at Gyrene's Annex. It takes more then thirty minutes to get a complete picture of the lengths these people go to. They've been at this bashing for neigh on three years now, and said some pretty awful and absurd things over that span. You miss some of the backstory of the main participants and their actions. They like to portray themselves as victims but are very uncritical of their own behaviour which, it has been my personal displeasure to experience, is typically far far worse.

Reading the GS forums have led me to understand how people can end up flying planes in to buildings, I kid you not. Oh, I knew the theory of radicalization, but never saw such a clear example off that. Isolated from contrary views, the angry back and forth of like-minded people creates a ramping up of the intensity and the abnormal turns in to the norm and suddenly what should've been batshine crazy isn't viewed as such any longer. I consider the GS a good place to visit if you are too responsible to go gawping at a car crash but want to get your jollies in another way. I visit there about once a week or when BFC drop a bone, just to see what the crazies come up with next.

To play a scenario you would have to have a version that is equal to or newer then the version that scenario was made in. If Hammertime v.6 was made in 1.21 then 1.20 might very well not be able to use it.

I'm going to be really controversial here and ask if the difficulties of the bocage aren't a wee bit overblown? The word bocage is almost mythical amongst warnerds. How much of that is really deserved? Take the area around Caen. You can't tell me the guys attacking through those wide open fields had it any easier then the guys slogging through the bocage.

I think it would need to be a name more accessible to Joe Public. Also, it may be worth having a title that serves as a reminder that this was a fun war, unlike the sucky wars we get these days. Combat Mission: Liberation Europe would be far more positive and descriptive.