killmore

I like games where my action matter. Secret Weapons of Luftwaffe - was a great game. Huge strategic level. X-Com: UFO Defense (there is still no game like it!, you can't blow up the walls in new "look-like" x-com games) CloseCombat 3 is good multiplayer. StarFleet Command would be great if their "Dynaverse" worked Shogun:Total War is fun even if AI cheats. Planescape Tourment is quite interesting.

Not "tigerski" with english accent. How about "Tygryski".

Actually I hate that "small" map size changes depending on number of points for Quick battle. When you select 5000 pts your small map is HUGE. I wish small map stayed small independantly of number of points. BTS - PLEASE keep map sizes independant from number of units. Let me play on small map if I want to. Or let me play Quick battle on the map of my choice!

Now is the enemy suppose to see you trenches? (But not being able to see your troops until you are close?)

I definitly had this problem Flak 88. No rotate menu. Other AT were OK

I hope BTS is listening

I had once same problem but only with 88 gun. Other guns were easy to rotate

You might be in trouble as they have run out of games lately. Sorry to say that but you might have to wait as long as 3 weeks!

BTS - please give us this "Unlimited" choice. The more choices we have the better game gets. This one should not force you to change lot of code. (just a tiny bit)

Please help BTS to sell more CM! http://www.pcgr.com/reviews/simulation/product_1156.asp

Right now in quick battle we are forced to choose units up to certain point limit from categories. We can adjust categories by selecting "Type" - for example Armoured/Infantry/Combined etc... Instead of forcing the player to choose from some categories only why not have "Unlimited" category? Let me/opponent choose from ANY type of units I want. This make battles much more unpredictable...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DanE: But what if my reflexes are just not as fast as yours or somebody elses? Should I be penalized because I can not click as fast as my opponet. So lets give people like me an option to slow it down even more. Perhaps 1/10 RT or 1/30 RT. Perhaps even more for those really big battles where I need to do a lot of scrolling to see all of my force. But then it isn't "realtime" anymore, is it, if you slow time down. And we haven't touched on the "gift" that RT games give their commanders: the ability to issue orders to any unit the moment their plan goes up in smoke thus greatly reducing the cost of bad planning and rewarding good/fast clicking. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Gimme an option. Don't play RT if you don't want to. The time setting depends on the player - the idea is to give you a choice RT/WeGo/SlowRT whatever. Once you have a choice you can play the way you want to. No one forces you to play RT. This is up to you! So stop complaining about your reflexes. Mine are just as bad that why I don't/can't play clickfest RTS games. If you want 1/30 speed when there are 100 units thats OK with me. The choice is yours! Please stop giving the argument that RT OPTION will force you to play RT and ruin the game. I don't want to take WeGo from you and me. Such option will only atract more players even if they come from CC board/darkside. I could make more money for BTS. Now you DON'T need two separate engines to run RT/WeGo. All you need to do is to stop RT engine every minute. Commanders gift to correct orders? - So what let player fix orders, just add some delay before unit reacts (already in CM). Whether that's accurate simulation - I just don't care. I don't think any current PC can run RT CM with appropriate speed. I don't want to take WeGo from you. The current CM engine might not be able to handle RT in any reasonable way - a major rewrite might be needed. (You could make turns 1 second long and allow to issue orders all the time but even that might not work in current CM engine). I don't want to force BTS to rewrite anything. Such decision is up to them alone. I can't see all implications on their code. If CM will continue to be WeGo thats OK with me. Currently find multiplayer boring since it takes 2 hours for 500 pts battle. RT would help that. I don't have 2 hours to play multiplayer. I am also bored to death while waiting for other guy. Single player is exciting and great as is. I LOVE IT. I also don't expect BTS to have RT CM for very long time.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schrullenhaft: I actually like the idea of a "semi-campaign" system. Basically it wouldn't require a pre-generated list of scenarios or even branching. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is actually reasonably easy to do. I have do similar stuff myself. All you have to be able to do is to transfer units from scenario to scenario.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by deanco: Oh NO!! Please!! I am touting this game as the answer to RTS!! DeanCo--<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> (there is diff between RT and RTS - I hope you mean RT) No one wants to force it to be RT. But RT option would be nice. I don't have patience/time to play 500 pts game in 2 hours. RT would make it faster. Now to handle rapidly developing situation in RT we could slow the game down say 1/4 RT. (Every RT second is 4 seconds in the game)

It is normal for troops to fire at their own comrades when they mis-identify them. This is a feature not a bug.

They should just improve the engine and add new units/graphics. That should be it.

It will not be less realistic in real time. (If done correctly) The real reason for no real time is that code was written long time ago when real time did not seemed possible. Major code rewrite is probably needed and BTS want to keep profiting from the code they already have without spending another 2 years to release next version. Even now you would probably need 1000MHz machine to run real time. I think real time option would be a benefit. It seems achievable by modyfiing turn time to be 1 second and adding another thread for accepting user commands.

MadMatt - got any graphic pictures?

Here is argument why they should not get any money (in US court): I believe there is a law that says that criminal cannot benefit from his crime through publishing a book about it. (or something to that effect) This argument can be applied to this case. Book describes crimes to be commited...

If I am playing 500 pts game where I am attacker I buy 3 Churchils, 2 platons of British infatry (they come with PIAT and mortar) and a couple of cheap scout car (British - they are worth 9 pts). Sometimes I add M-24 Chaffe (cheap with reasonable gun) I also found M-36 jacksons usefull but not as good as Churchils

By the way relatives are asking for 20 million USA. That would amount to stack of money as high as "Zig Heil!" (This joke stolen from Jay Leno) (No idea how to spell "Zig Heil" - someone below corrected me) [This message has been edited by killmore (edited 07-26-2000).]

I my opinion Ferdinant survivability was so high because they were so rare. If they would be more common the larger guns would be introduced to take them out. But since they were so unfrequent no one was worrying about them too much.

I think they are going for Quake-like game. Not a real simulation. I would love to sit and wait for PanzerII with AT rifle...

Hitler relatives are suing publishers to get royalties for "Main Kampf". I hope it does not spoil good name of their family.

Ok - but was the belly 100mm armor an overkill? Or was it usefull? It could be usefull or surviving AT mines and charges tossed under the tank but then again these will probably take out a track and immobilize the vehicle completly making it much easier to kill...