KAding

Hand-to-hand combat was pretty well done in the Close Combat series IMHO. You just heard some fighting noises and eventually one of the guys dropped dead.

I think silence is a good strategy by BTS. People here are spoiled by this constant discussion with the development team. It's getting so bad that their words are constantly used against them. Better keep quiet, which 99% of the other companies do!

You know what would be ideal. RT with replay functionality. The game should keep a cache of the last minute of the battle. While paused you could then rewind a bit to see what happened. But somehow I doubt this will ever be implemented.

I have no problems with the page in Firefox 2.0.0.6 on Ubuntu 7.04.

A BMP is pronounced as 'Bimp'? I've been saying 'Beeee-ehhhmmm-peeee' all these years! Edit: Well, at least I've been saying that to myself. I don't think I have ever uttered the word to anyone in real-life.

You won't have to wait months for a patch though. They said the 1.03 patch have a 'fairly short turn around', which seemed to imply about 2 weeks after the 1.02 patch. http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=002502;p=1#000010

They have already stated that fixing the 8800 issue is one of their priorities for 1.03. http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=002495;p=1#000020

I was a bit afraid of this when I decided to buy from Paradox. But then again, it is weekend. We can hardly expect them to work in the weekends to get the patch done. Heck, its probably illegal to work on the weekends in Sweden anyway .

Yes, but...

1:1 worked well enough in the Close Combat games, no? So why wouldn't it be possible with CM? Is it really that much more complex for the TacAI? If so, why? Sure the scale of CC was smaller, but I don't see how that would be relevant here?

I just hope Battlefront survives all the negativity surrounding CM:SF to still be able to make CMx2:WW2. If they survive that long to polish the game engine for WW2 I think we'll have a great game on our hands. As it is now, I would only rate the engine as mediocre. It is simply too unpolished.

Absolutely... +1

Same here. I just don't find the idea of a USMC module very appealing. What are the interesting differences between the TO&E of the USMC and US army anyway? I can't imagine any non-grognard paying to get USMC added to the game without any new features.

Maybe it's just my un-grognard mind here, but are others also underwhelmed by the prospect of a USMC module for CM:SF? I'm probably just not knowledgeable enough on the differences between the US army and US Marine Corps to appreciate their added value I suppose? They are all Americans to me . All I pretty much remember from my Steel Panthers games is that the USMC have LAVs and the army doesn't! But then, the army has Strykers nowadays and I can hardly spot the difference there. The IDF is what I want! Any Syria campaign is just not complete without them IMHO . [ August 06, 2007, 02:56 AM: Message edited by: KAding ]

It's only difficult because there is no lobby where you can meet people for MP.

I guess I don't get this post. HSG has scenarios that feature single tanks for your entire OOB...how much smaller than that can you get? While the emphasis for CMx2 seems to have changed to a smaller scale that doesn't mean that CMx1 can't portray that same smaller scale. BFC is trying some different approaches to modeling the combat portrayed. Whether or not they succeed in that is a personal determination by each and everyone of us. To say that CMx1 didn't cover small unit actions doesn't seem to hold much water for me though.</font>

Well. If it's any consolation, this is also the first time I've ever complained about performance on a game forum. It might happen to you as well sometime. Your carefully selected components might suddenly fail to work properly in one game or another. Just remember this thread when that happens, people like you don't like whiners so you better not complain about it too much .

Okay. So you explain to me how I should 'maintain' my computer? I have updated my graphics card, I have made sure all important drivers are installed. I don't really use Windows much anyway, since my main OS is Linux, so its pretty clean with few nonsensical programs installed or running in the background. What more should I do to 'maintain' my computer? Yes, all very nice. I don't run no dell either, except for laptops that is . Dell makes very nice laptops! . I'll do even better than that! I'm a professional programmer and in my free time I also programmed my own OpenGL game. So don't feed me this crap, please. Just assuming others are lying is not a very constructive approach IMHO. I'm not clueless about 3D graphics. I'm not very good at programming in OpenGL though, it is not easy to do efficiently if you ask me. Trust me I completely sympathize with BTS on this. You don't want to know how many hours I spend with people from my game essentially experimenting to get the game to run properly on half-arsed integrated Intel graphics chips, old Matrox cards or even older Macs. Yes, outdated drivers are usually the solution to most problems when people have ATI or Nvidia. With anything else it usually gets more complicated. Again, you don't want to know how often I'd had to tell people to update their drivers. Some screenshots of my game: http://www.callofcombat.com/screenshots/ Pretty ugly, no? . Yet, even with such simple OpenGL graphics I've had many people who had trouble running my game smoothly. Making a graphics engine work properly on a multitude of different systems is not easy at all, especially if you don't have spare cards and computers lying around at home on which to test and debug your game properly. Friend eh? You don't sound like a friend . Way too presumptuous . Anyway, there is something fishy going on with the 8800 GTS Nvidia card and CM:SF on my system at least. It's more than just 'low FPS'. For example, when keeping shift down the game can freeze for up to a minute. Rather than just being 'slow' the graphics seems very erratic, jumping from high to low FPS quickly while moving the camera. In my case using lower resolutions didn't help at all, while lowering the quality does have an obvious effect. [ August 04, 2007, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: KAding ]

Well, I'm not a n00b as far as computers are concerned. In fact, I am a programmer myself. I know about the importance of updated drivers. The simple fact is that the game is performing badly on my computer, despite a kickass graphics card. I'm running plain old 32-bit Windows XP Professional.

RT isn't too bad IMHO. It just depends on the scale of the battle. Battles in CMx1 and many other 'grog' games have always been too large for my taste anyway. RT works, but it requires smaller battles so the human player can keep a good overview of a battle. Some people don't like such smaller battles.

I have high hopes. I can see this evolving into some kind of super Close Combat, one of my favorite games of all time. A different game from CMx1 for sure, but still a great concept with great potential. I can see how you would be disappointed if you expected a sequel to CM though, rather than a Close Combat style of game . So CC Plus rather than CM Lite . Thats just my perspective though, perhaps comparing CM to CC is blasphemous on these boards, I don't know.

Same here. I got a nice new 8800 GTS 640MB graphics card especially in preparation of CM:SF. Other games run like a charm now. Turns out performance in CM:SF is quite horrible. On my other computer, with a similar CPU, but with a 'mere' 256MB 7600GT card it runs like 4 times better! Quite disappointing. I'm actually considering putting my 2 year old 6600GT back in to see if performance improves!

It's probably the { and } keys. I assume you have those on a 'qwertz' keyboard?

The review makes some good points. I just hope BTS is making enough money out of CM:SF to be able to fund the serious bug fixing and additional features that this game needs to make it a winner. It has potential for sure. But at this time, it is also very frustrating.

I always just select the embarked infantry and give them movements orders, rather than using the 'disembark' order. This way you can immediately set the waypoints and don't get the random disembarkation point. They just run out of the vehicle, immediately to the first way point.