FFE

Ease off the insinuations. I don't care for it, since I have kept to the point and at NO time disrespected your views or others in this thread. A motivating reason to go into the near future in a fictional conflict in the middle east with the subject and theatre so prime is clearly in the subject of this thread. So plainly, if you don't like my point of view, simply say so or please take a dose of Matt's STFU. Enough. I've said what needed to be said. You and I don't agree. I've said why this next title doesn't sit well with me, and each time I have to defend my rationale simply makes this more in-my-face.

The point of the matter is political, and not something I should discuss on this board. The perception of IEDs (rather than calling them, let's say, booby traps) smacks of an intentionally marketing tool. Suicide bombers & car bombings are not routine occurrences in offensive operations, rather they happen in greater frequency in the static environment. For instance, will there be women suicide bombers? Teenagers triggering remote IEDs? Becoming too "real" will likely push away the traditional wargaming community, who typically do not fixate on the ultra-reality of what happens under the hood in actual conflict. After all, I think including children into the mix (think Vietnam) would be unsettling. Game balance vs. the Fun Factor: the proposed Fun Factor disguised as realism is hitting too close to home. I, again, am going to pass on this title and wait for something less in-my-face. Hopefully, the marketing won't include "IEDs and Suicide Bombers" on the cover of your product.

huh? :confused: </font>

huh? :confused: </font>

FFE = CM Alpha tester and co-creator of Combat Mission HQ (until David H screwed thing). I sure as heck wasn't asking Big Time Software then or now, oh I mean, Battlefront.com to waste time or ask for hand outs at the local soup kitchen. The company's manifesto meant a lot to me, and I continue to desire this company's success. But, it appears the focus was lost. This "new" version of CM is 1) fictional and 2) a political firestorm. -Fire For Effect

Because, it stinks of the corporate mentality.

I sense a larger purpose to this announcement... It's not my thing, waiting for numero dos. All I can think of are political sensitive things, which are not appropriate for this forum. Things I see every day on the news. IEDs and suicide bombers? *shakes head in absolute dismay*

Six years, United States Navy

Very good news, indeed!

After an operation battle ends and during the setup phase for the next battle, all the poor saps who were in the 2nd story of a structure at the end of the previous battle are dislocated to the ground level and not usually placed back in the structure! This isn't a big deal if a player can re-position assets in the area, but sometimes the area becomes enemy controlled which leads a tactical withdraw of your men who happen to be having tea on a local public thoroughfare...

I want ogres and GEVs vs. the space prawns and cousin lobsters. Could we get a mod?

Sounds like a winner to me! ACM - Antiarmor cluster munition ACM - American campaign medal ACM - Assemblage of computer maniacs ACM - Attended combat macro!

I'll keep my fingers crossed that the game doesn't display too much information concerning troop quality.

Are my opponents going to see the quality of my troops? (e.g. Green, Crack, etc...) I'm hoping this is corrected in CMx2 or a total fog of war option, because it's unhistorical to drive by a knocked out T-34 and see that it's a knocked out veteran tank. Are artillery spotting rounds going to use smoke instead of live rounds? Will the the spotting rounds be "free" to use or are they going to count against the load out? My apologizes in advance if these items were already brought up.

Let's all go to the tractor pull next Tuesday night down in the swamp!

[southern Drawl] Whur isz my trusty shotgun! [/drawl] In all seriousness, just because it wasn't officially part of the arsenal, doesn't mean it wasn't used. Master of double negatives!

It was going to happen anyway

Yes, the situation that often leads the AI to maneuver out of well entrenched / placed locations is often due to a capturing a VL. The shifting of forces across areas often leads to AI forces being shredded with little to no impact, at least in large scenarios. What I would like to see is a "toggle" that permits scenario designers the option to select formations that could be "excluded" from the AI movement routine. Perhaps having a time selection that turns the "Do Not Move" or "Hold at All Costs" toggle off may prove very useful. Another "fun" possibility is to code trigger points that activate certain units and automatically issues a set of orders based on the scenario designer's intent. For instance, if an enemy unit crosses a bridge then a set of reinforcements appears.

Hopefully, the new version will permit the scenario designers the ability to manually set units to do not move! This would be a handy tool that prevents the AI from lunging forward from well established positions while on the defense.

*clap* *clap* *clap* Thanks for the poem XI!

I agree with your overall conclusion. There ought to be a few more shades, though.

Panzerfausts: Several million of them were made. Very effective, very lethal.

Ban von Nev before he posts a picture!!! (*closes his eyes and starts babbling*).

Matt, glad you had a good time. As for your question, while you are in the chatroom you can give your ip to your opponent by doing the following: /msg whoever 168.168.168.0 whoever = your opponent, but use your real IP. Or you can double click on your opponent's name, which will open up a dialogue box. If anyone is curious to find out their IP, go to this site: What Is My Ip? Enjoy

Great feedback! I'll do some quick testing and get with the results. Edit for test results: Axis Attack 8 PSW 222's vs. 12 hidden T-34's in scattered woods. All units regular. Average distances: 500 meters Scattered wood depth: @ 20 meters, turn 1: all T-34's spotted @ 40 meters, turn 1: all T-34's spotted It does not appear the hide command offers the defending vehicles additional concealment. [ April 13, 2003, 04:51 PM: Message edited by: FFE ]