ParaBellum

I got bored with QBs and 'purchase rules' already back in CMBO. I've been playing scenarios (almost) exclusively since then. To me it's far more fun trying to make do with what I get instead of cherry picking my forces. Unfortunately the option to let the AI pick forces IMO far too often completely unbalances a game, so I'm stuck with scenarios. Which isn't actually THAT bad... And I'd rather prefer a scenario where I'm hopelessly outnumbered/outclassed yet manage to put up a good fight in an interesting scenario then play a perfectly balanced QB where I spend half an hour in the purchase screen to maximize my points allocation.

*twitches* Since it is only 2 more days before Christmas I'd say we postpone the ritual disembowelment until the new year. *twitches* @ NS: This question has been indeed asked... a couple of times before. The answer is that, unfortunately, this isn't possible. Let's hope for CMx2.

In CMBB and CMAK the mortar vehicles can be "in command" of a (infantry) HQ. If they are in range you get the same red line as with other (infantry) units. As I've said, I haven't played CMBO in years, I don't know if this feature was already implemented in CMBO.

You target the mortar with the...mortar. You will still get the "out of LOS" targetting line, but it will show "area fire" instead of the usual "out of LOS". If you target (click on) a valid (in LOS of HQ) area, the "out of LOS" line will be replaced by the orange "area fire" line. A little screenie: 1: the HQ (must NOT be hidden) that is doing the spotting 2: the mortar in command of the HQ, LOS to target area is blocked 3: target area HQs spotting for onboard mortars are extremely effective. @ John_d: I haven't played CMBO since the day CMBB was released, but it's not about HQ bonuses but about spotting. So this should work for the mortar halftracks in CMBO, too. [ December 20, 2005, 02:26 PM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]

Hi Kitty.

I still have lots of fun with CMBB and CMAK. If CMSF doesn't seem to be fun for me (at the moment I'm less than thrilled about the Stryker brigade battling the Syrians...) I can hold out with these two games until the CMx returns to WW2 battlefields.

Stuff to blow up.

They suck. The Leather Goddesses of Phobos on the contrary are cool. And by that I mean totally sweet.

I want medics modeled for the Marines and Devourers for the Zerg.

Yes they can. As Jason already pointed out earlier, if you use the area fire command within 30m (IIRC), you get the option to 'use explosives'.

Good to hear that. I am less than thrilled by the idea of some sort of 'Commandos' game. My main interest lies in company/battalion level combined arms tactics, not in nursing a squad of elite soldiers through a village at night in order to capture 'vital documents' or to assasinate a high-ranking officer...

Actually my biggest problem with CMSF currently is how the BFC guys will manage to give the US player some sort of challenge without artificially gimping their forces and/or the availability of support. I just can't see a battailon-sized syrian force attack any kind of US force without getting obliterared by the airforce or superior artillery. How many sandstorms that ground the airfoce can you stomache before things start to get ridiculous? The only plausible way for any kind of 'fair' battles I can see at the moment would be a scenario where US forces were weakened by political decisions, like no heavy weapons/armour and no air support available due to lack of bases etc... So much for the sceptic in me. On the other hand, when I saw the first screenshots of a turn-based 3d-WW2-tactical simulation with the somewhat lame name of "Combat Mission" I thought it would probably suck, too.

Nice. Very nice.

You can actually play the CM series against the AI? :confused:

Oh, good idea. I want the Wiesel! I want the Wiesel! Wiesels are sweet. And by that I mean totally cool. If Ninjas would use armoured vehicles, they would use a Wiesel.

Soddball's Cross-dressing Weeks? No. I mean, hell! No!

They do? Both (the CM1 series and CMx2) are highly detailed tactical simulations using the we-go system on a 3d-battlefield. Scale will still be company-batallion level. Turns will still (most probably) be 60s. There will be a scenario editor and quick battles. Accurate OOBs. Extremely detailed weapons and armour modelling. Artillery and air support. Morale. Easy to learn but hard to master.

Point taken. Steve&Martin, so that means you still love us? I feel better.

4x6 km already sounds pretty homonu...humounomo... big.

I think they should animate the lightning thingie. Shock and awe, I tell you...

And look what I found on the Net: "Pixel Artist Required at Hunting Tank Software Friday, February 11, 2005 - 2:06:36 PM. Posted by *submitted* Pixel artist for a 2d based strategy game (think civilisation type graphics) required in Melbourne. The kind of work will be: - Creating Pixel artwork for a tile based PC Strategy Game, using Adobe Photoshop - Work with existing graphics to create new game tiles ie. can you change a regular building into a war damaged building, using just 20 pixels? - Development of UI components in cooperation with our UI programmer The job will be full time or near full time, working from home on your own gear at least part of the time. Experience with a similar role, preferably in gaming, highly desirable. For more details, please contact Bruce Poon at hunter@.....com." And another one from February 2003: "Hunting Tank Software is looking for an additional analyst / programmer = to work on our first title, a turn-based WWII Operational Level Wargame. Candidates should have knowledge and experience with (in order of = importance): - Python - XP (Unit Testing, Pair Programming, Object Oriented Design and = Programming) - Pattern Programming Familiarity with wargames of this genre would be useful. The position will be Part or Full time (to be negotiated), and will = involve work in the Melbourne area (Brighton and CBD) and possibly some = work from home. Could anyone interested please email me, hunter@......com or give me a call on XXXXXXXXXX." [ October 14, 2005, 05:34 PM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]

Abbot, fine. Out of the door, line on the left, one cross each. :mad:

Did you ever get nailed to a cross? Upside down, cremed in honey with flesh-eating ants crawling onto your body while someone tore off your fingernails while singing all the ABBA songs? In finnish? A fantasy CM... sheesh...

What I don't like about this whole issue is that apparently everybody not immediately celebrating CMSF is labeled as a "WW2 whiner". I am not affiliated with BFC in any way. I love the CM series of games and appreciate how the dev team has interacted with us on these forums for the last years. But in the end I'm just a guy who buys (or doesn't buy) their products. And if I am somewhat reserved towards one of their products for a number of reasons I think it's ok to voice my oppinion, in a sensible and polite way. Is it so hard to understand that for some people the setting of CMx2 is actually less than thrilling? And that some see problems regarding the replayability value and game balancing issues? I understand that some posts have been rather ridiculous and offensive but I think that BFC has recently lashed out quite a bit in defense of their "baby" too, see Steve's "WW2 whiner"-comment in this thread just to give an example. Of course, it's your game, it's your business, but some of your comments makes you look a tiny little bit arrogant, you know?

Reichenberg, my comments were directed at Renaud's answer. I saw your post only after I had submitted mine, therefore my EDIT. I agree with you...