thewood

I do like Big Butts. I take every opportuntity to quote Sir Mixalot. (I also like big maps with little clutter)

My first double post...ever, I have sunk to the low of the unclean masses [ October 01, 2007, 06:25 AM: Message edited by: thewood ]

The funny thing is I would have thought that the great lengths CMSF went to to simulate C2 technology meant that it would be easy to simulate the Syrian disadvantages in having their squad spread out. I still can't believe that Syrian squads get their orders almost immediately. What's the point of simulating C2? Also, why can't Syrians just split MG and AT assets, with all the penalties and more of no good C2.

Its probably a sign of how many people are playing RT TCP right now.

In reality, I find the manual not very useful. Its missing a lot of important info and a lot has changed in just a couple of months. I look at the manual now and every time I read something, I wonder if it is implemented or if its changed. Believe it or not, I actually have a small notebook full of information I've picked up on the forums and through playing. Thats a heck of a lot more useful than the manual is right now. edit: btw, I find game manuals' most useful aspect is designer notes so I know why and how things are expected to work. I find very little approaching that in the CMSF manual. You can glean some of that from Steve's comments on the forum. There isn't even a FAQ, which is the second most useful part of a manual.

I have access to Gartner's and IDC's reports at work. I'll see if I can find the right ones.

I would assume that any SW company would evaluate OS options. The answer is usually listed on the side box. Its known as supported Operating Systems.

Gartner Resaerch does look at freeware markets for Linux relative to market share. I'll see if I can find the numbers. Even with Linux freeware counted, Linux is tiny (almost negligible) in the home computing market. It really only becomes relavent in the server market with support from companies like IBM. IBM uses it as counter to MS becoming too powerful in IBM's customer base.

As I stated this creates some very frustrating situations in dense terrain. One of the main features of CMSF is urban warfare modeling. Yet, I can't recon by fire on any areas where the action spot is hidden from view of the firing unit. Before you dismiss this as not happening often, it is happening at least a couple times a scenario. I would imagine that this is an effects everyone feature. edit: to clarify, what I have an issue with is giving an area fire order that is refused because the firing unit can not see the action spot near the target. PS: I don't see where this is discussed in that thread. [ September 30, 2007, 05:56 AM: Message edited by: thewood ]

Might as well, nothing better to do

A decent series from the 90's was Tigers on the Prowl...the gandaddy of POA2.

Ah, Typhoon of steel...loved that series.

This is why Dorosh thought designers notes were critical. All the information is scattered around the forums and is just confusing the heck out of everyone. A detailed understanding of the grid and action spot system is needed to let people (especially me) understand what is supposed to be happenning.

Look at all the work that went into making SP last as long as it did. It was not the developer who did it. The developer made thier money and moved on. SP is almost almost an open souce product at this point. It has and continues to fragment. I actually like BFC's model. It actually relates more to ASL with modules. That is a good way to make it last 10 years.

I have asked a few times and not seen any official response. I knopw others have asked something similar. I have noticed that area fire seems to snap to a grid. Not only does it make it difficult to target a spot in dense terrain, I am curious what it does to any accuracy that weapons have.

Gotta love this forum. </font>

Well at least we won't be sitting around waiting all weekend again.

Are you stalking me. And if you are, are you good looking?

yes, although it seems to a lesser extent. It still doesn't really try to get away, but I have seen more willing to pop smoke.

We have had a couple threads like that over the last month with little input from anyone who has inside information. They have been in a couple of the forums. So we start one more thread on it and someone comes along and says why are starting another stupid thread on...so a search or sumfink. I feel very negative today.

Stop asking game questions and refresh! If enough of us keep doing it as quickly as possible, we CAN make it work.

All we are is all alone

Hey this is the longest one of my threads has ever lasted. Its usually a couple of post chastising me for being a moron and then off to oblivion with ya.

Even showing the status as cowering, at least we know there not just playing canasta while a firefight is going on.

So you don't think I should point out the ultimate reponsibility is BFC's? So whose fault is it? The people bringing it up maybe? Its like you can't criticize BFC around here. Having beta tested for a pretty crappy developer, I realize how easy it is for them to let the masses pounce on the testers. I would like to think BFC would stand up and say, hey I see you guys beating up the testers, its not thier fault, we heard them but had to get it out the door. That would stop the nonsense of blaming the testers.