Jump to content

Ron

Members
  • Content Count

    657
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ron

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Reading through all the verbiage, I think you have nailed it entirely. The original CMBO was such a hit with the wider audience because it was 'dumbed down' and accessible compared to what we have now. Everything since has been towards more, though not exclusively, the simulation side and as a result a more targeted audience and more 'effort' to play. My hat thrown in for opinions is while the graphics and engine could certainly be improved upon, a key to a wider audience would be making the game easier to play, ie Platoon/Company SOPs and Plans, to reduce some of the micromanagement required,
  2. Just bringing this forward again as I would like to see this guide also. Thanks.
  3. Yes I agree, I think also Baneman has been playing the smarter game to this point. While fully realizing it makes for a more exciting AAR, Bil's moves have been a gamble, a calculated gamble, but still a gamble. Bil is the defender here yet he is trying to force things instead of letting things develop and creating traps. His latest moves are more of the same imo. I'm really reminded of some games I played with someone from the early CMBO days who advocated that an armour heavy force would trump everything else. Our game results showed that a combined armed force prevailed, and I think the end
  4. I have to agree with sburke here. While an inconvenience to you, your actions are the exception not the norm. I would have no hesitation saying that the overwhelming majority of customers are unaffected, or if they are then use one of the surplus activations provided. No offense but stating the problem is no fault of your own is not entirely reasonable.
  5. Pretty high standards here for BFC and CM to measure up against - graphics from a AAA title, AI from a top tier chess program, I wonder what next?? Seriously people, I thought the player base was more intelligent than that.
  6. Wow, what a lack of perspective from several posters. Get a grip indeed. BFC have always delivered excellent products and excellent customer service. Your download isn't working? Perhaps try not letting your panties get in a knot and do something else and try again later. These rants show a lack of respect and good manners, and have been responded to in kind. I can't believe any adult would behave in such a way, pathetic.
  7. Hear, hear! But hey this is the internet right??
  8. It seems the 'good ole days' weren't that long ago when you wrote this: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1459095&postcount=31
  9. Thanks - hindsight but too bad that wasn't present when the flame tank rolled up.
  10. Yeah, I got to think that missed opportunity for Elvis to call down arty before Blau in a timely manner is game, set and match. Perhaps against another opponent he may be able to claw back to a semi even footing, but I cannot see it happening against Bil even if Bil fumbles handling the Soviet armour. (not likely) I did not see it, but does Elvis have any hand held anti-armour ability?
  11. Yes this is what I have been expecting, and probably what Elvis is hoping for also. If his infantry in Blau can fix Bil's infantry in the woods long enough for the 120mm to wreck some havoc, then I think that will dramatically alter the scenario. At least until Bil's armour gets involved anyways.
  12. I don't think this is that intelligent at all. You do realize I hope that many of the things you listed are diametrically opposed to the design intent of Combat Mission from the very beginning, yes even the first iteration whether some of that stuff was present or not? Agree or disagree, it's not that hard to see the path taken. That was why it was and is such a revolution for most. My take - Whatever happened to learning by doing? Seriously. Is it BFC's fault that a generation has an attention span of 45s and can't be bothered? No, it's their loss and I don't just mean CM.
  13. Wow what an interesting thread. As an outsider looking in I'm reminded of the circular arguments from my children; no apologies to those who are clamoring for 'cheaper prices, more content or whatever discount you feel entitled to', bottom line that's exactly what you want and face it you are only speaking for yourself. This old customer is happy with BFC's direction, happy with the content in modules whether new terrain, TOE or scenarios/campaigns and have never blinked at the price they are selling at. For me, these games and modules represent incredible value in gaming time. It bears re
  14. Lol! It seems to me that the 'alone' descriptor, to put it mildly, would be more appropriate to your distorted viewpoint. You are entitled to hold whatever opinions you wish, but wow you are out to lunch, your rants from what I understand are basically meaningless, without context or perspective. You don't appear to have any grasp of the larger simulation picture at all. Apart from the occasional outlier, I do not suffer from any of those issues you describe. Just to give some feedback from one who plays the games and modules regularly - there is too much content too fast. The idea that it w
  15. I think I have fixed Redwolf's angle here. For years he had been secretly pining to join the BFC team as the second programmer. He figured he would be the ideal candidate. Afterall, he had extensive experience programming and playing CMx1 and had clearly laid out where CMx2 had gone wrong*, and while riding Charles coattails to success wouldn't be the same as actually making his own game, he also secretly knew he did not have the wherewithal to do what a select few could. When news broke of Phil's hiring as the second programmer, Redwolf's hopes and dreams suddenly came face to face with r
×
×
  • Create New...