aka_tom_w

Wow This is a spectacular demostration of tolerance and restrait, on the part of BFC to not lock this thread. Maybe it can cool down now and just fade away..... please... (see my signature line for details) -tom w

Reference material: The World's Most Complete Collection of Light Bulb Jokes! Just in case more research is necessary. referenced:

The PBEM Bigots are, at least, consistent in that not even your reassurances will make them stop. So, Steve, why do you hate PBEM??? </font>

I seem to recall some well done mods in CMx1 of head bandages (white) with spots of red on them? no? Maybe we can mod blood on to some uniforms? now that won't be the same as registering a spot of blood on a uniform of a wounded man, but once again that one small feature might delay the game unnecessarily. IMHO I can live with it either way. (blood spots or not) -tom w

John Rambo to Steve: "They drew first blood" ! "That's what started it!" -tom w (I smell the lock coming....)

"and people who buy BFC games usually play them for 5 years. Protecting us from ourselves is not required." um.... and while we are at same thing for wide screen LCD displays and over size monitors/larger resolution requests. Protecting us from ourselves is not required. -tom w

I'm Still Laughing ! Steve's "Me - we agree that PBEM is important, but it might not be technically possible. That's the only reason why it won't go in." post was brilliant and histerical. Maybe Steve would consider stand-up comedy or at least an appearance of the Jay Leno show if he weren't making so much cash selling video games! Nicely done Steve! VERY entertaining.... and oh.... one final thought: "We agree (!) that PBEM is important, but it might not be technically possible. That's the only reason why it won't go in. -Steve" -tom w [ October 18, 2006, 12:08 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Um OK But did any of them actually PAY for the game? As you say, look who it appeals to and ask your self how many of them will actually pay money to legally buy the game? wondering -tom w [ October 18, 2006, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

I thought it looked like an interesting idea foor a game which is why I posted it here. (I had considered titleing the thread CM:SF meets The Sims in the Middle East but that did not really sound right...) I am also wondering about its potential sales? I am not in the video game business (NOT even close) but this does not look like a big seller to me? your comments? Will it sell well? or be a dud and flop, destined for the bargin bin in SHORT order? -tom w

web page Palestine Global Conflict home page This game is in no way a competitor to CM:SF but the setting is similiar and the movie trailer (from in the game) that they show on the web page is interesting. The music was very nice. (Good Middle Eastern Music I think) I have watched the trailer a few times now, and the graphics are not specatular, (maybe one or two "notches" above CMx1 style graphics) BUT the soundtrack on the video was somehow haunting and moving, like the opening theme from a movie, like Blackhawk Down. IMHO I mention it here only becasuse it is new, and game is set in the Middle east and it has civilians in it. Set in an urban Middle East setting (Israel/Palestine) with cars and checkpoints and the like. (But the player does not direct any military conflict, it looks like you are journalist and you "just" watch it go by. I think) -tom w [ October 18, 2006, 07:23 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

this was the last official comment as far as I can tell -tom w

bump

"It would be nice to be able to "light up a treeline" for suppression - my mg platoons might actually be able to really support an attack that way. -dale" I agree I expect to see more in the way of MG and HMG supression in CM:SF (maybe) -tom w

Roger that! (depending on the victory conditions and points scheme/allocation) I agree. Nicely put! Good post. -tom w

What about good old "warning labels". That was the best way in CMx1 IMHO Turn on warning labels in the first turn, but they don't actually "pop up" until the unit has something to report. When the lead starts flying warning labels show up and you see where its from from very far away, like level 5 way up over the action. NOW true, once you get into the battle everyone is reporting EVERYTHING and they all in trouble and all the labels are useless so then you turn off warning labels. That system worked very well for me. Thanks -tom w

thanks for the update -tom w

Excellent! Its gets even better! " the game would be FROZEN in all respects. Meaning, the only thing the player can do is request an end to the BioBreak. " Perfect, that is exactly what I had in mind when I posted the first time about the bathroom break. -tom w

OK then! That's the Spirit! Don't sit down and play RealTime head to head if you have a problem with frequent "bathroom breaks"!. A 2 minute time out for a bathroom break to relieve your self once or twice might be ok, but again if it take extra time to program you can always add it in later. Maybe something like a simple formula of one 2 min time out for every 30 mins of Realtime. For a 60 min battle you have have 2 "time outs" of 2 mins each at anytime, after that you just have to "hold it in". -tom w [ October 10, 2006, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

its Fluff if that idea delays the release of the game for even one day its not worth it. -tom w

Note to Self: Don't challenge Mav1 to play RealTime. Will there be an option in two player Realtime to prevent constant pauses in the action? I don't mean to be too draconian here, but I am wondering if there will be some mutally agreeable setting, to allow two players to play realtime without one player constantly pausing the action, if they can't think/click fast enough? Just wondering ? -tom w [ October 10, 2006, 11:42 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

My guess would be that one of the 'strengths' of most RealTime games is the build cycle. After MASSIVELY harvesting resources you build units as FAST as you can and build up a technological superiority as fast as you can. Then overwhelm the defender with both your numbers and your superior tech. A classic RealTime strategy. BUT in CM:SF there is NO production cycle and No resource harvesting. I am every bit as concerned about the Realtime fast clicking exploits as the rest of you, but as Steve as told us, simply clicking fast or sending all your tanks in the classic tank rush is simply not going get it done in CM:SF because there is no build cycle to replace your losses. That fact alone takes away a HUGE Realtime fast clicking "exploit". (Some might say in RealTime games like Warcraft it is simply SOP or a well known tactic that should not really be considered an exploit. There should be some advantage to thinking FAST and clicking fast, but wise use of your available units should be the first consideration, and any foolish player that thinks a massive crazy suicide tank rush will lead to victory will soon be disappointed depending on how skilled his oppenent is. I am curious about the RealTime Exploits as well. But one thing we should all remember Steve and BFC hate cheesy/gamey exploits as much as the rest of us and I think we can count on them for a patch if the gamey exploit is reported to them and perceived by the design team as an exploitation of the game system in a way they had not expected or intended. Just look at the evolution of the MG and HMG "protocol" in the CMx1 series,from CMBO to CMBB they removed so much opportunity for gamey exploitation (around MG's and suppression) of the game system, that some people REALLY disliked it, but it did make the simulation more realistic. (as intended in the first place) They are shooting for max realism in their military simulations, so I am guessing if a really glaring exploit or gamey tactic crops up they can deal with it in a patch if they don't catch it in beta testing, in the first place. (IMHO) -tom w

Excellent Smithers .... That should keep most folks more then happy. (IMHO) Thanks for keeping us up to date! -tom w

YUP that's a big advantage and for me it is an incentive to get good at REAL time to play more games more often in RealTime. You could (for instance) practice CM:SF in RealTime sole against the AI and (presumable, but who knows) savour a few lengthy PBEM battles as well. OR (hopefully) connect over TCP/IP and play head to head in RealTime with an opponent who as spare time when you do, and get more time to play quicker battles. It all sounds good to me! -tom w

In the past in CMx1 those games played fine on wider screen Apple Laptops I am running at 1280 x 854 now and I hope that is no problem. It should not be something that has to be build specifically into the game to support a non 4x3 screen aspect ratio. (I think.) I could be wrong but in CMx1 the screen aspect ratio did not matter at all as the Video RAM just cranked out as much of the game as the player had screen real estate to display. (At least on a Mac it seemed that way.) I am a little perplexed by this statement because, as I recall, CMx1 had no such limitation. Unless this was something specific to PC's and Windows that I know nothing about. It should be this simple, if your video card or video memory is up to the task (enough resources or memory or whatever you need) your computer "should" JUST fill your screen/monitor with the game in any aspect ratio you are using. But I could be all wrong about that. Sure the Game interface may be designed for 4x3 but the game and the landscape should still fill the full frame irrespective of the aspect ratio. (no?) I would like to think this statement holds promise or optimsm because ALL new Mac laptops and displays are wide screen. But I may simply be confused. :confused: What does Charles have to say about support for anything other then the "old" 4x3 aspect ratio? -tom w

oh oh well I was just trying to help.... I do apologize if my comments offended you. Sorry -tom w