Kwazydog

Hehe, well then why the totally out of whack comments as above that a Syrian campaign would be easier then GW1 or GW2...sorry its just hard to understand how you could think such a thing with the vast range of experience you say you have. You say youve enlighted us as to why the above is true but it must be well disguised as Ive looked and looked and failed to find any evidence of it beyond your own assumption that you are, of course, correct. One look at the recent events in Fallujah against a poorly organized, poorly trained and poorly equipped force should tell you to question this belief, but Im not interested in arguing the point as I doubt anything will change your opinion. As for having to earn anything from you no I do not nor do I have any interest in doing so. You past few posts have been more than a little rude and obnoxious even though I have attempted to be helpful, and as such your opinions hold little weight. It is very hard to respect someone who cant put forward an opposing view in a clear and respectful manner, sorry. Dan [ October 12, 2005, 06:18 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

In that case though Jon arent you really saying that it depends on who detonates the device and why more so than if the actual device coudl be considered an IED or not? Dan

Well thats a good way to insult every person on this forum interested in a modern tactical wargame. I can tell you you couldnt be further off the mark though. Zemke, with no disrespect intended that comment alone leaves me wondering if you have any real idea of what you are talking about with regards to modern combat, or even the current situation in Iraq. If you are truely interested in learning more I have suggest elsewhere some interesting books on the matter and the above AAR would be a good place to start. That being said, I suspect you arent, and for that reason and the fact you have left the forums I wont go into it further. [ October 12, 2005, 04:19 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Hey Zemke, Ive already challenged you to this and you conveniently missed it. Tell us what thread was deleted by us and Ill look it up in the logs and find out what happened. We DO NOT delete posts on our forums and never have, and this is a well know policy by our regular visitors. I locked your last thread because it was yet another whine about CMSF not being WW2 which had turned into a 'hi mum' fest and as such was just adding noise to the forum. On top of that you had posted your views elsewhere as well. I responded to you there in an attempt to help educate you with regards to the realities of modern warfare, but it appears that this is something that didnt interest you as you didnt even take the time to repond to my suggestions. If your aren’t interested, we truly do understand, but if so you probably wont find too much of interest too you in these forums in the near future. Dan [ October 12, 2005, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Zemke this certainly isn the case, even the current situation in Iraq should unfortuantely teach us what a poorly equiped, even poorly organised yet determined for can do. If you would truely like to get an idea of the challanges that would face a US force against a determined foe, particually in an urban environment where much future combat is likely to occur, try reading the AAR stickied above. Dan

Time will tell guys but I would say yes, we would certainly want to see these type of things in game Dan

Thomm Ill see if Steve can give you some answers tomorrow Dan

Hehe, consdiering Steve has said pretty much the opposite all along Id like to know where you read that? To repeat what Steve has said...yes we hope it will be in, yes we want it to be in and we *currently* havnt found any problems that will mean it will not be in but we can *not* say for certain until we get further along in the development cycle. Until we do that is really all we can tell you. Dan

Zalgiris, I think that if you reread Steve's post you will find that he is saying solo play is in...when he said head to head only he meant no multi-multi player in the first version Dan PS And by Multi-Multiplayer I mean several players playing on each side of the battle. For instance on one side one player could be in charge of Company A, another player Company B and another in change of Tank Force A, etc.

Which is why we clever enough to make sure our beta team and advisors consist of just these types of people, with a vast range military experience and combat service. So no, I don't believe this is a formidable challenge as we have been and will continue to run CMSF past these type of people at every stage of development (with very positive feedback thus far, Ill add, too). Dan [ October 10, 2005, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Also to add to what Steve said there is actually a lot of information out there available on Russian equipment and capabilities which is openly available, even including their newer gear. And as such it will mainly be some of the US gear that may be somewhat harder for us to tie down (and there is actually quite a bit of info about on it if you look hard enough). Anyone interested in info on the Russian gear should check out the below book as it has a lot of interesting information in it... Soviet/Russian Armor and Artillery Design Practices: 1945 to Present Dan

Sounds like a good plan to me, so Ill lock this one up Dan

Hi Tom! Im sure you are going to get a bunch of good answers to this but firstly a quick question...is the problem you are posing really all that different from maneuvering Shermans in an environment where the enemy may have had a couple of Flak 88 waiting for you? To compare the modern weapons you mention with WW2 equivalents I think you would be much better off thinking of an RPG as a Panzerfaust and an 88 Flak as an ATGM. Dan

I didnt think the Iraqi's were supposed to have any, which is why it caused such a concern at the time? Dan

Well I must say Im kinda surprised at your comments Plucker, at least at the tone of them. As someone form a country whom very rarely sees their troops in wargames you’ve truly got to understand that your outburst here with comments like 'screw foreigners' does sound more than a little childish to say the least, particularly when our company has members living in several countries. Ill just say two things. Firstly, if we had wanted to make a game in Iraq and we felt we could make it an interesting tactical game we would have, and I honestly doubt the response would have been more outrageous than some of your comments above. If you had taken just 5 mins to explore the difference between Syrian and Iraqi terrain and equipment you would know just how different such a conflict would be from the current situation in Iraq, and thus the reasons why we chose it. Secondly, your summary of modern warfare is seriously out of whack with reality, unless you are basing it on first person shooters that is...I wont got into details as I doubt your open too them, but at least try reading the AAR posted at the top of the forum. I wont comment further as I really dont think you wish a rational discussion on the topic and as usual when people go into meltdown you’ve apparently left the forums anyway. Dan [ October 10, 2005, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

OKay guys, gonna lock this. We have no problems with hearing people thoughts particually as the response has been exactly what we expected but lets keep them to the threads we already have, okay. Dan

Hehe, well I cant disagree with you there Mord. And yes I suspect that we have a few people here using multiple accounts, which is against forum rules for just this reason, and later today I am going to do a search and ban such IP's if any are found. Unfortuantely this will also mean that their origional accounts are frozen too as they are linked to the same IP, but them are the risks you take I guess. Dan

Gunghoyank (aka tenardier & goldstein) please refrain from harassing our forums or I will take it up with your ISP. We have had to do so in the past in situations such as this and in every case the ISP has been very understanding and responsive to the situation, particularly when we have the evidence of the harassment documented for them to see as we have here.

I guess I missed the CNN report where the US had gone to war with Syria. As always we thank you for your input, but as your IP resolves to the same Frech ISP as 'tenardier', whom I banned only a short while ago, youll understand if we feel that it isnt an entirely objective opinion. Dan [ October 09, 2005, 07:09 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Well I think we are using different terms here...Operations were part of creating scenarios form my point of view where 'modding' to me has always referring to altering the in game graphics. The later I can give you info on but youll have to ask Steve about the former Dan

Sirocco, can I just ask what you are referring too here? As far as Im aware there should be more for modders to work on than with previous versions. </font>

Sirocco, can I just ask what you are referring too here? As far as Im aware there should be more for modders to work on than with previous versions. Dan

Retik, the screen shots are from a very early stage as far as terrain is concerned...what you see is merely a base for the soldier to walk on with no details added at the moment. There will be much for varies terrain and urban environment see in future screen shots Tufen, there are many reason to choose syria but from a game perspective alone they have more interesting and advanced equipment, thus provide a more serious challange to the player Dan

Roq, pricng isnt my department and I have no idea of what it will be when it comes to it...I can only say that I hope we can fulfill your needs in that area and I truely hope you find it a fun and interesting game to play once the demo is available Dan