aka_tom_w

OK I have given this some thought. There will be some people don't like this game, but they are the same folks who were not interested in CMBO CMBB or CMAK because that kind of game doesn't not do it for them. If you liked CMx1 style games (the 3 mentioned above) my guess is you will find CM:SF to your liking. But that's just me, and I am just guessing. -tom w

Rating 12+ (PEGI) Minimum Requirements Windows XP 2.0GHz Pentium 4 or equivalent 512MB RAM 1 GB Hard Drive Space 128MB Graphics Card supporting a minimum of 1024x768 DVD-ROM Drive Broadband (required for online multiplayer) This information is based on specifications supplied by manufacturers and should be used for guidance only these are listed on the play.com pre-order page this is the first link I have seen with specs PC windows only no mac version specs on the play.com preorder page

just to be clear.... is allenj7 the same previewer JaguarUSF? And you are saying you have official access to a legitimate preview beta of the latest build for promotional purposes and you are not under any Non Disclosure Agreement restrictions? correct? -tom w

Hoolaman! You should know better! :eek: ...shocked that you could post a thread with a title such as this.

If I was to guess about this I might suggest: something like: System Specs CPU: Pentium 2.0GHz (or better) Operating System: Windows XP Professional RAM: 1.0 GB (512 megs bare Minimum, 2 gigs or more likely for faster playability in RealTime ) Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce 7600 (?) bigger and faster is always better (More RAM means better frame rate right?) Sound Card: You need one Internet: DSL Monitor: 1280 x 1024 max res Hard Drive Space: 350 GB HD : 350 GB free space :eek: BUT that would just be a guess [ May 29, 2007, 08:10 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Moon </font>

if I was to make a bet..... (and you should know I hate to lose!) I would bet (JUST me personally, based on what I have read in this forum)..... the game WILL be released between June 21 and Sept 21st 2007 That would be sometime this summer!

I think they said there will be a demo I am pretty sure the Demo will be fun, like it was in CMxx releases. I don't have any idea when the demo will come out, but I would say the demo will be the best introduction IMHO. -tom w

I think they said there will be a Demo Probably sometime this summer the demo will undoubtedly let us get a feel for what this one is all about. They have a history of releasing GREAT demo's and wonderful demo scenario's. We will be able to take it for a test drive before we buy, (as always) so if we can be patient enough to wait for the demo (that's getting harder now I know), I am sure all these questions will be answered completely to your satisifaction the first time you fire up the demo (again, sometime this summer, we are told) -tom w

Steve says: From what Lt. Mike posts and common sense this sounds about right. I would suggest this aspect of the game will be modeled as accurately as possible. -tom w

Sadly I laughed, (because it is more then half true, "15 free casualites per mission") but its not so funny considering how many service members including test pilots have lost their lives and left behind grieving family members during the lengthy testing process of this overly expensive alabatros. Statistics about the deaths caused by this aircraft are not handy at the moment, but last time I looked there was a website with a timeline and an alarmingly long list of service members lost in Osprey crashes. The last time I looked I was deeply moved and greatly saddened by the loss of life this aircraft has caused in crashes and failures. [/rant off] -tom w

OK I am impressed with that part! "but the fact that CMSF now models each soldier individually and that there is no more abstracted gunfire 'bursts', but rather that every pull of the trigger from your men is both visually and audibly ! Well Done!!! Very nice. tom w

They measure their customer satisfaction "the old fashion way", by the bottom line and hard sales. Just buy the game, and keep buying their games until you are dissappointed in the level of service or gameplay, that's pretty much the sum of their customer satisfaction survey, sales. Pre-order the game the first chance you get. Offering Pre-orders is their idea of a customer satisfaction survey. tom w

Interesting article on unconventional warfare in Iraq Link edited and corrected. (see page 26) Turn pages and read the magazine for free online ! interactive table of contents here! [ March 17, 2007, 06:02 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

interesting read a magazine online!! (its a good article too! but its just a picture so you can't cut and paste the text. (I know I know, you all very happy, that I can't cut and paste the text.) Defense Technology International article about anti EFP defense on AFV's From Dec 2006 [ March 17, 2007, 05:59 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

"Personally, given the fact that the Stryker is quite a vulnerable vehicle up against enemy armour, I think this will make for a more exciting game. You will have to think more in terms of force protection rather than gung-ho assaults when you suspect that enemy armour is in the area, at least while you wait for Artillery and Air assets to come online." I too have been lurking in this thread and following the issues back and forth. I would like to suggest one thing missing here is that virutally any vechicle of any kind on the modern battlefield is vulnerable to ATGM's and to a lesser extent RPG's. This is the same for Bradley's or Strykers. I could be wrong, but I thought that on the modern day battlefield all vehicles could be destroyed my some form of shoulder launched missile. Sure, that is a very broad statement, but the whole concept of light, medium or heavy AFV or IFV is really a mute point when a Javelin or Russian equivalent launched by a couple of soldiers can and will destroy them ALL equally well. Once again Steve and Adam and the rest know WAY more about all this specifics then I do, but I thought that missiles that can destroy any vehicle (either shoulder launched, tube launched or launched from aircraft) were the real issue that needed to be talked about, not whether a Bradly or a Stryker is better or more specialized for this role or that. My point is, it really does not matter because irrespective of what armour or vechicles the opposing side presents, any and all friendly vehicles will blow up all the same when two guys behind a bush launch an ATGM and it hits the target. Wasn't there some comment about "egg shells with hammers" refering to tanks (mostly Allied) from the WWII CMBO discussions, sounds like the same old same old to me. Bradley Vs. Stryker? (who cares, they are both egg shells with hammers in the eyes of a Russian ATGM, Kornet?) -tom w [ March 15, 2007, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

the unofficial count down thread rears its ugly head Will the game be at the gold master stage with in the next 90 days? just wondering? -tom w

the M2 and M3 are in, here is the "planned vehicle" list from the web site: web page from CM:SF promo web site

just an interesting web site where they make them near London Ontario: Main Page Land systems web site more video's and pics here, from this promotional site: multimedia web page video's of a wide assortment of vechicles they sell just for interest sake:

If anyone is really interested there is a ton of info online if you google: "Combat Lifesaver" Combat lifesaver US military page (looks official) [ March 08, 2007, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

yes I would have to agree that makes the FAT choice the easy and obvious one to go with. (BTW I don't have my intel Mac yet) (but then, I don't need it yet do I, because the game has not been released yet so I can wait it out.) -tom w

thanks jj amazon.com reviews

"The British approach is higher risk. it means spreading yourself thinner in smaller groups, and potentially higher casualties, but as a way of winning the war it's probably a better long term strategy. Peter." um well, OK, except for the practice of landing large C130 transports on less then secure strips of dirt now and then. -tom w

I am REALLY looking forward to RealTime to play and practice against the AI. Realtime will shine and may be my first choice when I want a challenge against the AI because there will be instant gratitifaction and no waiting. (I am in my 40's and reallife leaves my playing time limited so I still want instant gratification, and as much game play per minute as possible, so realtime against the AI for solo play will be a HUGE bonus.) Against human opponents I would suggest only the most highly skilled (AND Quick thinking) players could do well. BUT that is what I hope to be working up to agains the AI in Realtime practice. Captain Foobar, I understand there will be some form of RealTime "Time out" feature for a bio break or snack I think. (If this is new to you my understanding of the TimeOut feature was a pause in the play that did not let you issue commands or study the map or anything, JUST a stopage in play with a blank screen, BUT that is JUST from a fragment of memory that Steve mentioned a LONG time ago, last time this came up.) -tom w

there is no cause for concern regarding MY mental abilities