ScottK

Yep, this is happening every time I try. Should be easy to replicate and fix, right? BTW, I am NOT experiencing Cavtroops other issue, with the comps resolution being changed after app close. I run the game at 1280x960 and my desktop resolution is 1024x768.

I have experienced the same issue as Cavtroop's #1 above; upon aborting an in-progress artillery barrage the game crashes. Before the abort I tried to Adjust Target of the barrage but nothing happened when I clicked the button (2-3 times). My specs AMD Athlon 64 3500+ 3.00 GB RAM Radeon X800 XT 256 MB(8.205 drivers)

Sounds like you are taking full advantage of the computer medium to enhance your game, Dan. The campaign system was always the meat and potatoes of the card game IMHO, and it looks like it's lost none of that tasty goodness in this version. You say you have taken out the randomness of bombing. Any changes to the randomness of flak? My anticipation grows!

I am a big fan of the card version of DiF and was wondering how the campaign system will translate into the computer version of the game. Will players still be making resource choices and drawing for random missions, or is something new in the works? Also, when playing player vs. player in a campaign, will you be able to save in the middle and resume at a later time? Depending on which campaigns are included this would be a great feature as some of the campaigns (Guadalcanal, for instance) can take a long time to complete. Can't wait for this to come out, best of luck to Dan and Battlefront in putting together a quality adaption of DiF!

This sounds pretty cool! Please send me a copy of the rules if you would. imnagash@attbi.com Thanks!

I too will play a Stalingrad scenario first. Before I play, however, I will have a moment of silence in memory of the pain and suffering delivered unto the Chiefs by the surgical machine that is the New England Patriots.

I'm in the CMC2. I believe my position is Allied Company HQ, but I can't find the email that was sent to me to confirm that. Scott Kimball

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: You won't get Bocage in DYO's. The resoning, well I asked Charles this and he said that when the computer made maps with Bocage they didnt look good. So they arent in. Bocage really takes some tweaking for proper appearance in maps. Its tricky stuff. Dont know about planes. You wont get them in 1.01 but I thought someone said they got one in a 1.02 DYO ai picked force. Not sure though. Madmatt Madmatt <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well that explains it then...no bocage due to mapping problems (I was beginning to suspect as much) and no airplanes in 1.01 (which is the version I have). Thanks for the replies...I was beginning to wonder if I was just bucking the odds in not getting these items. ScottK

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael emrys: Are you picking your own OOB or letting the computer do it? Michael<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I should have mentioned that I'm referring to battles in which the AI picks my forces. Picking your own OOB severly limits you...you can get better stuff when you let the AI do it (though at times it can be a crap shoot). In all combined arms QB i've played in which I picked my own forces I've never been able to get any artillery above 75mm. Let the AI pick your forces and I've got 105's to spare

Having played many a QB I realize that: a) I've never gotten a map that contains bocage I've never received aircraft as part of my forces (I ALWAYS play Allies). I'm thinking (a) may be because I almost always choose the default month (November I think) or later...so the Allies wouldn't be in bocage country. Has anyone seen either of these two things in a QB? p.s. now that I think of it...i've never received the infamous "armored clown car" either. Now I feel I'm REALLY missing out!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dumbo: One thing that amazed me is how at the end of the battle I flipped around in birdseye view point and realised the battlefeild was completely different than I had imagined while playing, "Oh I could have advanced in cover there" or "egads that was a nasty crossfire I walked right into." And I designed the darn map! 8)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So true. Additionaly, I find myself thinking "why was I so bunched up...if I had just spread out!" Playing in this way really causes you to do things you would NEVER do in normal play...like keeping your men close together so you can keep an eye on them and keep them in support. In normal play its so easy to just move that squad further away into that copse of trees...in "ironman" mode you really fear what that copse could hide!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: ScottK: Perhaps I missed the mark. I was satirizing the fear that CM would somehow be distracted into a 1st person shooter, by providing a few simple props for Level 1-only play. I liked your concept and I am fine with it even if BTS never lifts a finger to support it. I thought it might make a cool PBEM option, but I would be just as happy with a shiny pebble. Please disregard. The idea got a little ahead of itself.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> yeah, was just using your satiric jab as a launching pad to make a point. Guess I'm feeling guilty for using the term "first person" to describe this cool way of playing. And I agree with you, BTS could not change a thing with this game and I would think that I ripped them off by only paying $49.

<But if they're interested, the modeling of the trigger pull on my K98 is too light for factory standards, and the failure to factor the entrenching tool as a portion of the squad's defensive capability is UNFORGIVABLE. Spoils everything for me.> I know you are just being funny here Mark IV, but I would just like to point out that no one here (i think) is suggesting that this game become or include features that make it a first person shooter. I think my topic title is a little misleading...playing CM in level 1 mode does NOT make it a first person shooter. It only makes the challenge of leading your troops, moving them to optimal positions, and keeping track of enemy units and the geography a little more difficult and a lot more exciting. It makes CM a different game, but in no way, no how, does it make it like Quake...and please believe me I don't want it to be. Those games bore me (well, after I get over the YEEHAH factor). I find "Level 1 Play" a nice diversion from regular play, and it spices up your games vs. the AI. It's my opinion that the level 1 view can be used for more than watching your 150mm artillery fall on the enemy from THEIR perspective (though that is of course fun) Dumbo...just started playing your scenario...up to turn 15 and it's great fun! Anyone who hasn't tried playing "Level 1 Play" and is interested in giving it a shot should definately use this scenario as your starting point. (I hope there are no surprises waiting for me in the remaining turns. My men, or is it just me, have had enough!) ScottK

Not sure if this is something BTS needs to code or not...its fairly easy to play in this first person mode on your own...just limit yourself the applicable views (just view 1 for me). Though putting in a feature that disables all other views wouldn't seem that difficult, or time consuming...definately SOME work but maybe not as much as David surmises. David does make a good point, though...this is SUPPOSED to be a 3rd person game. The fact that you can get a lot of enjoyment out of it by playing in 1st person view is just more icing on the cake. It takes some work getting used to, and some fortitude to resist pushing the 4 key, but well worth it i think. ScottK