hoolaman

Yep, after all the talking about how complaining about CMSF is like wishing hexes were in CMBO, it seems that hexes are back! The action spots seem to be just hexes (or squares more accurately). Units tend to move like a knight in chess, 1 across then two forward. Spotting seems to be similarly effected. cf shooting through walls.

CM players don't all live under rocks. We have heard of these games before too. I played plenty of RTS in my time, and prefering WEGO CM is not mutually exclusive

I would imagine that this sort of thing falls in the same basket as the "dust radar". There really should be a value assigned to smoke and dust for spotting (and therefore FOW) purposes. I guess this sort of involves dust becoming more like a unit than a special effect. The hard bits would involve spotting calculations for altitude of dust to each unit.

Yeah man...how beautiful are these?! I longed for rocky textures like that in CMX1! So damn awesome! Mord. </font>

He he, or the start of a squad dance routine. "CMSF :The Musical"

If we're going to quote the Bard, let's not mangle one of his finer lines, shall we? The proper quote is "Cry 'Havoc', and let slip the dogs of war!" I believe you were saying something regarding pedantry? </font>

Oh come on, Steve, this is nothing but denial and evasion. You sound like George W. Bush when asked if he has made any mistakes. I'm going to give CMSF another shot with 1.03 but you cannot go unchallenged with this guff re. bad reviews being about reviewers who "didn't get" the game. </font>

I would completely disagree that it is about the power of the computers. The real issue is that giving the TacAI subtle nuances is a matter of programming rather than raw processing power. If games companies would commit hundreds of man hours to developing amazing AI for a game, games would be an intellectual and entertaining experience. The problem is, people would appreciate it if it was there, but would not miss it if it wasn't

I also really appreciate the music in the game. I remember BFC contracting some famous dude to do it. IMO it was well worth it because the result is just right almost reminiscent of the great "Red-Alert" game music.

I fail to see how this is the "real issue" to date, since I don't see anyone else mention it except you. But maybe they are preoccupied with the other technical and design issues. Maybe when the game is fully patched and working as it should this is what we will all be complaining about. Something to look forward to?

argh crap

Nicely bumped on your own thread . I wonder about things like small patrols, two man scout teams, single sentries and the like too. Especially for WW2. I am sure CM will never be a commando simulator, and I think there was a thread about this a long time ago. But it does beg the question in a game that now simulates individuals whether things like capturing a prisoner or a clandestine raid can or should be simulated. I agree that there is a fine line between a spy with an IED trigger and a Commando setting demo charges on a fuel dump. But I am sure BFC won't touch this with a ten foot barge pole so I guess it is all academic.

Could you please explain to me how this is, in any practical sense, different to having to sit through a whole [insert elapsed time here] watching the blue bar grow in CMx1? </font>

This is a clever topic and at the same time it is a bit misleading. BFC has perhaps earned the right to make this game. It is a bit self-indulgent, but also is fundamentally intended to provide a much much better sequel. The only reason this game is a big deal is because we have such high expectations from BFC, and because we view it through the lens of their previous games. Of course, if they were just starting out, they would make sure this game was released in a fit state, but it would also not be judged so harshly without the CM1 comparison. Clearly they have deviated from their original philosophy.

Yep, I think if the dust cloud really reaches above that huge hill, you should be able to see it. Of course, when you can trace it down to the exact origin and know that a vehicle is *right there* it becomes less realistic. Maybe unspotted hexes should have invisible dust up to a certain altitude?

I agree. I reckon 30 second turns and 5 second pauses are the way to go. I think the vehicles follow an underlying grid like chess moves. They seem to go one diagonal then six forward instead of just going straight there like we could even in CMBO!

Yep, this game is such a leap forward from cmx1... </font>

Madmatt, would it be possible to look into a <u>patch</u> for the 1.01 demo to 1.02? I guess that is a lot of work for little gain, but there will be a number of people (at least one ) "demo-watching" to see how patches are changing the game, with a view to a later purchase, and downloading ~300mb every couple of weeks per patch is quite a bandwidth drain. I don't know if you pay for the downloads but if so it would save you guys too.

So people who prefer turn based games and loved Combat Mission must now give up computer games altogether?

I am pretty confident you will see some form of AI improvement in every single patch, game and module from now on.

I am the same. I loaded up CMSF and found that the inability to fast-forward the boring bits was very frustrating to me. I also found that the ability to queue up a line of orders so your guys do what you want for the next 60secs was more difficult than in previous games (yeah this is not CMBO blah blah). So I tried playing in real time. The first two frustrations are eliminated, but a massive one took their place. I am going along when I hear a deadly explosion. I scroll around to find where it was, and find a dead stryker. I have no idea how it happened, who killed it, what the graphics looked like etc. Yes it better simulates chaos of battle but it is not FUN. The WEGO replay is fun. I believe quite a few people are only grudgingly playing realtime. Here are my suggestions for a few WEGO enhancements: * 30 second turns. Modern combat is too fast and the first playthrough too boring, why not have 30 second turns? * A time faster thing (time-compression?) even 2x would be great if your system handles it so you could skip the boring bits in WEGO. * Better flexibility in commands, SOPs etc. so your guys can behave in an appropriate manner and help the TacAI along.

Arty smoke is mentioned in the manual, so I guess it will get put in at some point.

I already posted there too, but I thought the topic deserved its own thread. Time will tell if anyone else thinks so!

I got the demo, and screwing around with the editor, I have been quite pleased with what I have seen graphically. There is the capability to put in some really thick trees, and the combinations of undergrowth and overgrowth make for some great scenes. I am particularly impressed with some of the screenshots in the scenario forum. Some of the creative folks are coming up with terrain that looks truly amazing. I was unimpressed by a lot of the screen shots pre-release, but I think that was more a problem with the subject matter than the capabilities of the engine. I do however have some criticism of some of the terrain types. "CONCENTRIC CIRCLE GRASS ALGORITHM" I don't know if anyone has noticed, but the placement of the grass particularly, but also the trees when you zoom out, tends to form concentric circles of grass tufts around the camera. I think this is a result of the algorithm used to place these features, but it looks pretty odd sometimes. "SCRUB AND ROCKY NOT SCRUBBY OR ROCKY ENOUGH" As far as I can tell, "rocky" puts down a few pebbles on the ground. I imagine rocky to be boulders and broken ground of a sort that it could be very hard to dislodge infantry from. CM1 treated its rocky tile a bit like this. Also I think "brush" should be a lot thicker and rougher, of a type that it should be very difficult to see infantry hiding. Also when used as undergrowth, I can imagine a few fallen trees and that sort of stuff. "LOD AND COLOUR SATURATION" These issues have been mentioned before, and I know BFC is onto the LOD stuff, but I think the maps would look a lot better with "heat haze" or lowering of colour saturation with distance. ATM it all looks very clean and sharp, whereas dust, heat smoke etc can create hazy conditions over the whole map IRL. Anyhow part of my post is a question. I don't have the full game, only the demo, so I have made up a few maps but never played battles over them. I was wondering how these terrain types are treated for cover and concealment. I am thinking especially of the thickest groves of tress and stuff. THANKS!

I thank you for your efforts in compiling this test. I don't really think the results are that satisfactory as far as accuracy of the simulation, and it is not our only option to be happy with this. As SlowMotion posted, we have all been in real life woods, and seen thick growth that blocks sight of anything beyond 30-50m. This is really in line with what we accept from CM1 ie. thick woods blocks LOS at about 40m. Simply CM1 meets what we expect from reality and CMSF does not. Syria's terrain resembles somewhere like Italy in many areas, where forests and thick scrub exist as well as more arid areas. If the game cannot simulate these it cannot even simulated its chosen theatre, and does not bode well for WW2.