thewood

Never said it didn't work. Show me the quote. Are you reading the posts or just knee jerking. I'll explain it. You put a thread up about a new technique for 1.05. 1.05 is not out. I assumed this technique was new to 1.05. Made the comment its only a promise until 1.05 is out. You change the name of the thread to 1.04.

I have a feeling its the animation part that takes the most time. And the rush thing is probably a big part of it.

myself, I'm not looking to debate BFC on the strategy of developing CMSF, I am just looking for answers to questions about what is supposed to do what. Go take a look through the support and tactics threads at questions that haven't been answered by anyone official. Out of respect for your customers, I would think you would at least try to get some of those answered.

Steve mentioned that this was one of the hazards of doing a modern game. You can't predict how things will change in a short period of time.

I have only seen this once and I just wrote it off as a one time thing due to pathfinding.

I wonder if BFC is trying to outlast us whiners. Once we all finally drop off, they'll come back.

What disturbs me the most relative to CMSF is that those lower numbers were a lot of the people who defended CM1 in fromt of some of the naysayers in the day. I have noticed that hours go by without a single post in this forum. That is only 3 months after release. That should be all the referendum you need.

Yikes, is this what the CMSF forum has come to; a discussion on PS3. CMBB forum is almost as active as this one.

I have found a lot of wierd stuff in WEGO when it comes to ammo levels and unit status. It is hard to point out to anyone because of the way the replay only shows the last status as of the end of the previous turn.

Part of my job is recommending technology companies for VCs to invest in. Not that BFC would ever consider it, but getting external investment from VC's or angels is selling your soul to the devil. Its happy for the first six months. Then they come looking for their money + 40%. On the other hand, not many VC's would be interested in investing any money in a company with the one programmer being almost the entire future of the company. Part of any investment contract would be to expand the programming staff. For a very small company like BFC, investing in another programmer is a huge leap of faith. It would be a big financial burden for months and cash flow considerations could overtake even the best run companies while getting everything gelled. The only effective way to do it is find someone with a steady 9-5 job and convince them to work with Charles for a small piece of the company, while still maintaining thier current job. Of course that means less for everyone else at BFC. I remember I worked for a manufacturing automation company about 20 years ago and I was the only revenue generator. There was the owner/manager, a sales guy, and me doing the field work. I quit and the company went under. I would think BFC is in a similar place.

If I remember correctly some people have been pining for the follow command since CMBO beta.

Its actually the typing cap. My spelling is quite good. My typing sucks.

Is asking a basic question negative now. Are you guys on purpose trying to get people to give up?

I haven't tried AI arty in 1.04, but the issue I ran into now that I put the memroy cap on was I had to set the targets ahead of time and if your plan deviated even slightly, you were screwed. Welcome back Soviet arty planning.

I guess that is what I am getting at. I am trying to figure out if AI reaction philosophy has changed or have tactics evolved (devolved?).

Given the two hour time constriants, can CMSF effectivly replicate this action? I mean there was much more maneuver than firing, where as CMSF seems to be the opposite due to the short time limits imposed.

Thanks Chainsaw, that would have been my guess. If the 72 was moving across you, would you let it go or position to engage?

Frankly I never even tried it. Never thought of it. You orignally titled the thread 1.05. I assumed it was something new in 1.05. I had to assume you meant it was something new in 1.05, because why would a beta tester say it was how to do it in 1.05, if it wasn't something new.

Actually the easier part is if you have one guy doing it. It stays consistent and they become VERY experience. The hard part is probably what BFC is feeling now, scaling your programming resources. If everything goes well and you have a quality release, not a lot of issues you can't handle. A bad release with a lot of programmming support needed on the fly can crush small companies. I have seen it dozens of times in my job.

Rollstoy, I thought I would never be saying this, but there are a aspects of ToW that are better implemented than CMSF, from the RT perspective. A lot of the things I have issues with in ToW when it was released are also in CMSF. I ridiculed ToW for pathfinding, on map mortars, TacAi responses, self preservation, LOS vs. LOF issues, etc. And guess what CMSF has the very same issues out of the box, and to some extent, today. ToW is more limited in scenario design and battle size, as well as no WEGO. Its been months since I played ToW and am worried CMSF is heading the same way. I am hoping the Marine module comes out sooner than later to rejuevenate CMSF.

I know we had 1 or 2 M2 drivers around so I thought I would ask this. What would you or your commander's reaction be to having a T72 suddenly appearing 500m away, 1000m away, or 100m away. Would it make a difference if it was moving or you were moving?

Why did the title suddenly change to 1.04?

Actually, I just double checked. It does say 1.05. Therefore not usable. No timeframe on 1.05. We are over two months past release (edit: it is actually three months). A lot of aspects of the game aren't playable. I have been a loyal follower of BFC and CM. I still have high hopes for CMSF, but right now I feel I have been left a little hanging. I have brought up a number of issues just looking for clarification, along with others. Little to no official response. As far as showing us stuff in 1.05...we kept hearing how 1.04 would get us there everytime we brought something up. Now the same response for 1.05, and not even officially. Am I going to come back in a year and be hearing the same thing for 1.22. I still say the priority should be on just explaining how the fundamentals of the game should be laid out for us to understand so we can play effectively. Right now, I can at least 75% of the games I start because something that I think is screwy happens. It may be a bug, it may be I don't know what was supposed to happen. Example: Strykers not firing at infantry on their own. Should they fire, at what range, should they be buttoned, etc. I personally have asked this question at least 8 or 9 times and others have asked. I don't think there was one official reponse about what is supposed to happen. What should I think? This whole game is built on the concept of the Stryker platform. A simple question on why they won't fire without a directed order. Why won't they do anything to preserve themselves. Nothing. btw, this single issue is one that makes me think that the core concept of CMSF is RT, with WEGO bolted on. Instead, we get how great 1.05 will be. All well and good, but can someone official from BFC take a look at this forum and the support forum and answer some questions. You may have to go back a bit. Some of them were asked weeks ago. I have a feeling a lot of bugs that people are claiming they see are actually the way the game is supposed to work. But right now, I don't know. My status with CMSF is I haven't played it in about 9 or 10 days. I got so frustrated after spending a Saturday building a scenario and then having things just not work right that I actually removed CMSF from my HD. I am in the process of reinstalling to try the Viper scenario out. This is how I have been with CMSF. I love and then hate it. Right now, I am hating it. Hope for 1.05 may swing me back the other way, but that can only happen so many times before I just plain burn out on it. With that said, I agree that some of the more acidic comments aren't helpful, just as people defending CMSF by always pointing at the next patch aren't helpful. What is helpful is bringing up issues anywhere you can and looking for offical answers on these issues. [ October 30, 2007, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: thewood ]

I agree with that priority. Even the people I play MP with in CM1 played well over 80% SP.

I apologize. I thought you said it was in 1.05. Didn't realize it was usable now.