aka_tom_w
-
Posts
8,130 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by aka_tom_w
-
-
1. Some of us are hoping to order it Direct from BFC before Jan 2007 but in stores. no.
2. Um, maybe slightly future combat technology, like what they "think" might actually be available in the field actually working maybe 12-18 months from now, but mostly it I think they are telling us it is "present day Modern land combat" technology simulated in the game.
-
Thanks Kingfish
That sounds good
-tom w
-
Hi Folks
Its been awhile since I played CMAK competitively but this coming weekend is my annual gameing/fishing "away" weekend with the guys and I can't recall what flags are worth in CMAK. (We will be playing TCP/IP head to head all weekend.)
Are there only large flags and no small flags in CMAK?
What are the flags worth in Points?
Aside from Cover arc's (which I feel I have mastered) what other new tricks or techniques should be used most effectively to play and win using the allies in CMAK? (as opposed to CMBO)
is there a tips and tricks for CMAK thread somewhere?
Besides the value of Flags that I don't know and the Joy of cover arc's which I do know what else might I have forgotten or overlooked about CMAK
I always play the Allies and we will mostly be playing ETO scenario's so my confidence is high.
Thanks!
Any comments suggestions or tips will be greatly appreciated.
-tom w
-
Just wondering....
Is there anyone reading this with first hand experience of this flood and disaster in New England at this time?
-tom w
-
got it thanks!
-tom w
-
Hi Folks,
Its hard to believe but I have never played this one before.
I would like to play August Bank Holiday next weekend Head to head in CMAK but I can't find a download site.
Can someone let me know where I can get August Bank Holiday for CMAK?
Thanks
-tom w
-
-
when is E3?
-tom w
-
We should really give Steve and the Boys the benefit of the doubt here, (really!) I am pretty sure they are all doing their level best (and then some!) to get CMSF out the door and on to your hard drive as soon as possible. (I understand they are motivated by the profit margin on the sale of their games.)
IMHO they have a very ambitious feature set and agenda and it would NOT surprise my one little bit if they have not run into a few real challenging coding snags. I have NO idea and NO inside information, but I am aware the same of all of the rest of you that they are actually inventing something that has never been developed before. (game of the scale and scope of CMSF) They have publically stated their desired feature set and there is NO other game out there or in even in development currently (as least not that I am aware for the HOME consumer market), that has now or plans to have anything close to their anticipated feature set. (seriously)
SO...
Lets cut them some slack and hope to have it out by next Christmas break. If we get it sooner than that I will be pleasantly surprised.
The fact that there is no CMSF web site by now might suggest at least to me (and I could be wrong) the game is still at least 2-3 months away from gold master status. (BUT of course I hope I am wrong.)
Just save your pennies and wait and see...
-tom w
-
This EXACT demographic (circumstance or whatever) applies me too. In fact I would suggest it describes the situation for most of the folks I have PBEMd and have met through this board.I'm not really a computer game freak. CMAK/CMBB is the only computer game I play. I don't spend many hours gaming, because I'm not only busy with work but I also have numerous other interests in life. But when I want to play a game, it has to be a wargame, and it has to be WWII.I would guess Steve et. al. are more than aware of this demographic.
(I hope)
" I'm not really a computer game freak. CMAK/CMBB is the only computer game I play. I don't spend many hours gaming, because I'm not only busy with work but I also have numerous other interests in life. But when I want to play a game, it has to be a wargame, and it has to be WWII. "
Well put!
-tom w
-
I have seen a XP and an INTEL mac and it works great.Originally posted by REVS:Owning a Mac and being a wargamer mostly interested in WWII aint much fun right now.
The only hope is to get an Intel Mac, buy a Windoze system and a PC version of CMAK, and hope that works – which I have a nasty suspicion it won't, not without some video card carry-on, which I don't want to think about.
I don't have one, but we have one at work running XP and its fast
and the guys there are playing Quake and the other networked PC first person shooter games with NO PROBLEMS. IF you got an intel mac and wanted to run a PC version CMAK on XP my guess is it would be NO problem. I don't have a PC verision of CMAK but if I could "somehow"
get a copy could test it at work.-tom w
-
its WAY too quiet
-
GREAT post by Bigduke 6!
(Great handle by the way)
VERY informative and to the point..
and yes, it sort of "sounds" right on to me!
(i.e. the oringinal "rant warning" post)
thanks!!!
-tom w
-
Very interesting
good find:
GREAT article about the Role of Armor in Urban Combat:
Role of Armor in Urban Combat link
This is the pic I think John was refering to:A basic lesson learnt by US and coalition troops engaged in counter-insurgency operations in Iraq, as well as the Israelis in their Low Intensity Conflict with the Palestinians, is that a fully integrated combat team is crucial in any urban warfighting environment. Across the spectrum of combat action in urban warfare, a mutually supporting combined arms (armor-infantry) tactical element can achieve success while keeping casualties, as well as collateral damage to a minimum.Due to its nature, fighting in urban environments rapidly decentralizes and is extremely difficult to control even at the lowest tactical fighting level. At small-unit tactical levels, (squad and platoon) light infantry forces (not adequately armored) face serious disadvantages. While moving exposed in an urban environment, dismounted infantry troops may be subjected to intense hostile fire, sources of which are difficult to locate. Normal small unit weapons lack adequate firepower for subduing well protected enemy bunkers and, especially, carefully camouflaged positions in buildings. Decentralized tactical movements through built-up areas results in severe difficulties in maintaining control and mutual identification. In this type of situation, the danger of fratricide casualties also becomes acute. This inferiority can be compensated for by using armored vehicles like the ones available in mechanized infantry units, provided that the vehicles are adequately protected by add-on armor or other protective suites capable of withstanding Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPG) and heavy Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) attacks
[ April 05, 2006, 06:47 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
-
My spidy senses are tingling...
-
I understood that if you computer was new about a year ago you would be "OK".
New as in not "bottom of the line" new, just current and average to above average.
So my "guess" its ONLY a guess is that any you buy new now will be fine. Of course as always, the more RAM you have and the better video card you have the better off you will be. 64 megs of VRAM my be a decent "guess" at a minimum.
This is ALL conjecture on my part but their company history suggests they do not want to make every potential customer go out and buy the latest and greatest hardware JUST to play their most recent game release.
But I am JUST guessing and spectulating based on past history and what I have been reading (some time ago, granted) on this forum.
-tom w
-
Something also about how "spring" meant 3 months up until June 21st , or some general hint that when you say "the second quarter" it actually means sometime around the end of June. (But for the record I don't think they ever said anything about "the second quarter", just the standard, "it will be done when its done" and that "might" be sometime in the spring, which goes right up to June 21 (technically) in the northern hemisphere, and its a WHOLE other story if you want to throw in "spring 2006" in the Southern Hemisphere!)
FWIW
-tom w
[ March 30, 2006, 04:21 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
Vista is alledged to be able to run on the new intel Macs with less problems in installation then the current Windows XP on intel debacle.
When Vista runs on intel macs we will have TRUE dual boot systems....
Woo HOO!!!
the next generation of the Mac intel processor should be the 64 bit version, the current first generation intel processors out now are only 32 bit.
I really hope sometime next year my next new (company leased) Mac intel laptop (64 bit intel dual core "something" chip) will be able to dual boot into VISTA with NO problems and no headaches or imcopatiblility issues at all.
(maybe)
-tom w
-
"How about Tahiti! They need to be liberated from the French."
Damn Straight!!
Those cheese eating surrender monkeys use their foothold in the Pacific to test Nukes in God's paradise. Bah! :mad:
Remember the Rainbow Warrior!
(you can't sink a Rainbow)
-tom w
(sorry for the off topic, politically motivated RANT!)
-
"The only question is, will there be too much work for the developers, in coding in a construction set."
YES!! ...
I would like to play this game BEFORE my next birthday, OR before the end of this year AT Least! I say NO way to the construction set, buy some Lego or Meccano if thats what you want. (Or just play another game like Drop Team)
" You can take the philosophy of realism too seriously. "
Not really! (Not at BFC anyway)
-tom w
[ March 17, 2006, 08:48 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
The thing about "Iron Man" FOW rules or play style that interests me the most is it would almost totally elimate the odds based "min Max" mentality of making ALL tactical decisions based on "stacking" the odds in favour of attacking the opponet at his most obvious vulnerability.
Now sure this is a great tactica and some once had a Signature line here that said something like the true art of war (or tactics) is learning how to avoid a fair fight, so selecting a tactic to exploit the opponents vulnerabilities is a legitimate way to get the job done. BUT my point is that for MANY many years of old style war game (board game) play the only tactic any one every used was to find the stack with the weakest units and in attack it with three other stacks (hex based board game) of your strongest units and then claim that was "Good tactics". I played lots of board games and every time I played I HATED the fact that both players KNEWS with absolute certainity where all the other guys forces where. There was NO fog of war and it simply boiled down to an excercise in who could get the best min max battles and roll the dice the best by selectively attacking only the opponents weakest position or weakest units. Agian NO Fog of War.
NOW
Lets look at Iron Man Rules????
You want Fog of War, hell the FOW of might be so thick the game would be unplayable, BUT one thing for sure there would not be any of that "Min Max" crap, it would be a fly by the seat of your pants battle for sure. I truly hope the Iron Man FOW option is available on the CMx2 version of the WWII ETO so I can avenge my OLD old board game war gaming buddies with good tactics in a theatre of their choice (they ALWAYS played the Germans in WWII) in a game and setting and FOW setting that would make the only tactic they know USELESS! (look through all the counters, count all the odds and find the attack where your strongest units over run the other guys weakest unit!)
he he he
(sorry for the old, bad faith, bad memories, board game rant, I can 't remember how many times I had to play the Russian's on the opening day of Barbarosa!!)
-tom w
-
very interesting observation...
Originally posted by Peter Cairns:Paul Beaver a respected UK Defence Analyst was on the Radio today (BBC SCOTLAND) and his comment was that the lack of coverage or information, made him think that this was more like an "Excercise" than an assault.
This is a massive sweep but it is more about being seen to be able to do it, and in testing the iraqi's in a mission of this sizes that an actual assault.
Peter.
-
Sadly I have never had the actual self discpline to pull that trick off, but I would be thrilled to play that style of FOG and limited view and intel if it was a FOW option, HINT HINT. (Both sides locked into Iron Man rules for the duration of the game, NO cheating!)Originally posted by MikeyD:"...being restricted to a first person perspective of the battlefield."
Have you ever tried playing one of the old CMx1 games staying at ground level and never going beyond your own front line? Holy crap, the game gets challenging then! When artillery falls outside of LOS it REALLY falls outside of LOS! You hear the explosions, the ground shakes, but you don't have a clue what in hell's going on! Anyone bored with fighting in CMx1 just needs to abandon the 'God's eye view' and play a few games locked with your units. The anxiety level increases exponentially when you can't hover over the battlefield. It'll be an adventure and a half.
If I knew the other player's view as also limited to the same "level 1" view as mine I would think that would be a GREAT option of Fog of War and playing the game. It might be a GREAT new addition or FOW option or setting for their NEXT big game 1-2 years away) when the CMx2 engine goes to the WWII ETO for its next Expedition abroad.
-tom w
get a copy could test it at work.
Digital Delivery Platform launched! 30% Discounts on all Downloads!
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
WOW!!!
Thanks!
Thats sounds great!
-tom w