MikeyD

Just want people to be clear, that LAV 3 pict above is the CMSF1 vehicle with the CMSF1 texture on the CMSF1 terrain.

Eh, I don't see any harm in posting a pict since early models had already appeared in the AAR.
 

Eh, I don't see any harm in posting a pict since early models had already appeared in the AAR.
 

A bit of a heads-up. I'm giving the Leopard 2s an eleventh hour reworkimg. I'll try to get it into the AAR players' hands.

Eh, I don't see any harm in posting a pict since early models had already appeared in the AAR.
 

Eh, I don't see any harm in posting a pict since early models had already appeared in the AAR.
 

Eh, I don't see any harm in posting a pict since early models had already appeared in the AAR.
 

Eh, I don't see any harm in posting a pict since early models had already appeared in the AAR.
 

Eh, I don't see any harm in posting a pict since early models had already appeared in the AAR.
 

Eh, I don't see any harm in posting a pict since early models had already appeared in the AAR.
 

As a general rule of thumb you should never set a completion date to Friday the 13th. Its unlucky.

The 'operational layer' is the backstory written in the manual. Top rank in the sim doesn't even reach up to bird colonel status, I think. Which means someone else would tell you where to go and what to do and, if you're lucky, why you're doing it. You're no more able to shape the course of larger events than a first sergeant.
Other things that people have been lobbying for that Steve has been against: Field commissions and increases in experience levels over the course of a campaign. Steve, if I recall correctly, felt those are also outside the scope of game. An individual's career track has nothing to do with the tactical situation being presented. Besides, in war movies isn't it always the guys on the fast track to success who are the most incompetent? (referencing 'Cross of Iron' and 'Catch 22')

As a general rule of thumb you should never set a completion date to Friday the 13th. Its unlucky.

As a general rule of thumb you should never set a completion date to Friday the 13th. Its unlucky.

About T-72 types. BFC greatly modified the old CMSF1 T-72 list and revised the models. So the 'speculative' T72 types have disappeared and T-72s in the game will be easily recognizable to anyone familiar with armor in Syria. God bless internet Google search engine in that regard.

No, it doesn't 'just go on'.  All this whining over not getting the impossible fantasy game people dream up in their heads gets tiresome. I've been reading posts like that since 2000. My family Subaru can't be used as a dump truck and schoolbus and snow plow. And the car should have been half the price too, or maybe free. Why is the car design so BROKEN?

No, it doesn't 'just go on'.  All this whining over not getting the impossible fantasy game people dream up in their heads gets tiresome. I've been reading posts like that since 2000. My family Subaru can't be used as a dump truck and schoolbus and snow plow. And the car should have been half the price too, or maybe free. Why is the car design so BROKEN?

No, it doesn't 'just go on'.  All this whining over not getting the impossible fantasy game people dream up in their heads gets tiresome. I've been reading posts like that since 2000. My family Subaru can't be used as a dump truck and schoolbus and snow plow. And the car should have been half the price too, or maybe free. Why is the car design so BROKEN?

The CMSF2 'trenches-become-ditches' are a legacy terrain feature of the old CMSF1. Charles had wanted to eliminate them entirely but decided otherwise so as not to break existing CMSF1 scenarios. They're not in other titles besides CM:Afghanistan. In CMSF2 the in-terrain 'trenches' have been replaced in the scenarios by standard FOW fortification trenches where appropriate and kept when used by scenario designers as drainage ditch terrain features.
Two things Charles didn't like about those in-terrain 'trenches' in CMSF1. First, they broke fog-of-war rules. They were seen by both sides as terrain features. Second, the scenarios took a framerate hit because of them, though framerate in CMSF2 has so greatly improved over CMSF1 that the trench-ditch feature hardly has an effect anymore.

BFC was faced with two choices. Either allow CMSF to expire from old age like CMBO or entirely rework the title to bring it up in line with currently active products. BFC put a LOT of work and expense into CMSF2 and they're practically giving it away to 'legacy' CMSF1 owners. The point is CMSF2 will remain an active viable title on their store shelves into the foreseeable future. Wondering why CMSF got upgraded is like wondering why Toyota bothered to upgrade the 2006 Camry for sale in 2018.

Funnily enough, during Beta testing I can't recall any testers actually complained about balconies. I don't think there have been any changes. Perhaps we've simply grown used to the 'tactical difficulties' inherent in throwing troops onto a balconied floor. I recall a couple months ago quipping (half-joking) that if a scenario designer has put a balcony on a building in a scenario you should assume he's deliberately messing with you.

Game engine developed in the 1990s? Huh? If you're going to post ad hominem attacks get your facts right at least.

One thing that war movies taught me is if you're faced with a German machinegunner behind a sandbag wall eventually he will stand up, clutch his chest and fall forward, the sandbags collapsing beneath him. My source: SPR, The Dirty Dozen, and innumerable episodes of ''Combat' and 'Rat Patrol'. Wouldn't it be funny if the most 'factually accurate' war film turned out the be 'Catch-22'?
'Reenactor' type movies tend to be deadly dull. The war (whichever war) is meant to be the backdrop to a proper human story, not the story itself. Technical accuracy, whether in U-boats, tanks, aircraft, or swordplay is the added spice that flavors the dish.
 
 

One thing that war movies taught me is if you're faced with a German machinegunner behind a sandbag wall eventually he will stand up, clutch his chest and fall forward, the sandbags collapsing beneath him. My source: SPR, The Dirty Dozen, and innumerable episodes of ''Combat' and 'Rat Patrol'. Wouldn't it be funny if the most 'factually accurate' war film turned out the be 'Catch-22'?
'Reenactor' type movies tend to be deadly dull. The war (whichever war) is meant to be the backdrop to a proper human story, not the story itself. Technical accuracy, whether in U-boats, tanks, aircraft, or swordplay is the added spice that flavors the dish.
 
 

Game engine developed in the 1990s? Huh? If you're going to post ad hominem attacks get your facts right at least.