c3k

No fair! I almost choked on my sandwich. My wife was about to start with the Heimlich maneuver. You gotta warn people before tossing things like that out there.

Wow, C3K has never been called a good loving normal person before in any of these forums.

Some day we will probably get more specialty AT arty and bombs.  Don't Russia and the US have a lot of smart AT DPICM? Im thinking about the kinds that deploy the hockey puck smart bomblets that look for their own target to hit 'em with HEAT from the top or EFP from the top.

Here's a pict of a Bradley turret, you can just make out the thickness of the bolt-on armor covering the rooftop. That's a good inch of 'something', probably not steel. You haven't seen a 'naked' Bradley without a hefty layer of applique ceramic armor since the mid-80s.

I am left wondering about your mental stability. There is no indication, implicit or explicit, that you were joking, sarcastic, or trying to make a deep statement on the horrors of war. Instead, you've posted a statement expressing a desire to see children in battle, with all that entails.
 
A public apology would be appropriate, or I will add you to my ignore list as I consider the type of sentiment you've expressed to be the product of a sick mind or a depraved and evil individual.
 
And then you posted this:
 
 
My bold. Really? Perhaps you need to rethink your opinions.
 
 
Back OT: I'm glad to hear a roadmap for further development and releases.
 
Thanks,
Ken

What playtesting ?
The scenarios are not updated at all.

And what miracle ?
No matter of CMBN, CMFI or CMRT, it the same game essentially. So how should a engine "upgrade" with a few additional features be a miracle ?

Wiggum15,
 
A small piece of advice. It's free, so it's worth exactly what you value it. You ask a lot of questions, but you cloak them in criticisms. Some criticism is constructive. Yours is not.
 
A point: "Then why dont they hire new people with better skills ?" (That's from you, just a few posts up.) I don't care about the rationale behind the statement, just the statement per se.
 
- You are on a forum paid for by BFC. They are a small company. The money to support this forum is money which is not going to get a muffler replaced. It is money which is not going to replace that old furniture they got when they got married. It is money which is not going to buy a better Christmas gift for their daughter. It is money, literally, out of their pocket.
- Other companies support forums. Other companies have a far greater budget. Yes, $1,000 is valued differently. Ford (or Daimler) would think nothing of a $1,000 expenditure. How about you?
- You are a guest. As am I. If I went on Intel's forums and demanded that they use AMD cpu's, I would (probably) be banned. Rightfully. As a guest in someone's home I act with deference and civility to my host. But maybe my concept of civility differs from yours.
- Your statement, above, presupposes several insulting assumptions.
-- BFC doesn't have sufficient skill. There are, what, six BFC employees? Just name them and state they are incapable of creating a game the way it should be done. Your passive aggressiveness would at least transcend to outright aggressiveness. It would be more honest that way.
-- Other people do have the right skill. ("You can't do it, but someone else can." That's more insulting than just saying "you can't do it.")
-- BFC (again, just name the decision makers; it's simpler) is too ignorant to recognize the need to hire other people.
-- BFC is too cheap to hire other people with better skills. The assumption is that the budget is there, BFC is just hording the money.
-- Other people with those skills exist (that is a foundation of your initial insult)
-- Your idea of how a game should be created is better than BFC's idea
-- Your idea of how to run a game company is better than BFC's idea
 
Now, that's a pretty surface level dissection of your insult. I, for one, do not take anything you write seriously.
 
I suggest, again for free, that you consider criticisms a bit more before you make them. It is easy to criticize that which you have no idea how to do. That demeans you, as your posts here have done. If you had created a company and successfully released several games, your criticisms, as insultingly as they are delivered, would have some validity. As it is, they have no validity and are merely insulting.
 
Regards,
Ken

Lacroix, how do you think privately owned businesses work? Yes, you pay for their gas. Or did you think that the money sent to them in exchange for their games they make goes to someone else? That money is called "income". It pays "salaries". Salaries enable people to buy gas.
 
And this is why I find your posts to utterly lack any credence.
 
Regards,
Ken

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

Wiggum15,
 
A small piece of advice. It's free, so it's worth exactly what you value it. You ask a lot of questions, but you cloak them in criticisms. Some criticism is constructive. Yours is not.
 
A point: "Then why dont they hire new people with better skills ?" (That's from you, just a few posts up.) I don't care about the rationale behind the statement, just the statement per se.
 
- You are on a forum paid for by BFC. They are a small company. The money to support this forum is money which is not going to get a muffler replaced. It is money which is not going to replace that old furniture they got when they got married. It is money which is not going to buy a better Christmas gift for their daughter. It is money, literally, out of their pocket.
- Other companies support forums. Other companies have a far greater budget. Yes, $1,000 is valued differently. Ford (or Daimler) would think nothing of a $1,000 expenditure. How about you?
- You are a guest. As am I. If I went on Intel's forums and demanded that they use AMD cpu's, I would (probably) be banned. Rightfully. As a guest in someone's home I act with deference and civility to my host. But maybe my concept of civility differs from yours.
- Your statement, above, presupposes several insulting assumptions.
-- BFC doesn't have sufficient skill. There are, what, six BFC employees? Just name them and state they are incapable of creating a game the way it should be done. Your passive aggressiveness would at least transcend to outright aggressiveness. It would be more honest that way.
-- Other people do have the right skill. ("You can't do it, but someone else can." That's more insulting than just saying "you can't do it.")
-- BFC (again, just name the decision makers; it's simpler) is too ignorant to recognize the need to hire other people.
-- BFC is too cheap to hire other people with better skills. The assumption is that the budget is there, BFC is just hording the money.
-- Other people with those skills exist (that is a foundation of your initial insult)
-- Your idea of how a game should be created is better than BFC's idea
-- Your idea of how to run a game company is better than BFC's idea
 
Now, that's a pretty surface level dissection of your insult. I, for one, do not take anything you write seriously.
 
I suggest, again for free, that you consider criticisms a bit more before you make them. It is easy to criticize that which you have no idea how to do. That demeans you, as your posts here have done. If you had created a company and successfully released several games, your criticisms, as insultingly as they are delivered, would have some validity. As it is, they have no validity and are merely insulting.
 
Regards,
Ken

Wiggum:
 
1. Please don't derail this thread and cause the topic to be closed.
2. Just because something CAN be improved doesn't mean it NEEDS to be improved.
3. There is NO perfect game. Anywhere. Every single one can be improved.
4. Yes, I'd like a little better pathing/formation in CM...but it is so minor that it is only a tweak, not a "bug".
5. Things that I think are "tweaks" are not things I think "need(s) to be fixed."
 
My post was to point out the technical limitations of home computers and the ramification of a 16-fold increase in action spots. Also, if I had to place each man, the game would not be playable. It is a very well done balance of detail vs. playablility right now.

I believe that politeness is key for good critiscism.

The first thing to do is to never, never attack your opponent directly. Always remember: Engage the problem, not the opponent. Else you won't be able to move forward.
 
Second: Make the other person feel understood. If you say "I believe that this and that needs improvements" and somebody else says "nope", first follow point one (don't attack) and then show them that you are on their side: IN this case, you both want to get the best out of a game. Don't say "You are a fanboy", or "F****** old breed", say "I can see where you are coming from, and, while I agree with some of your points, I do believe that further clarification is needed, so that you can understand mine". Be constructive.
 
Third: Be careful how you open up an issue. If you say "This is s***, this should change!" you'll immediately see the answers you got: If you attack something others will defend it. Instead, try to show everybody what your motivation is, and why you believe your way is better.. "I'm seeing other games with features I believe might improve the experience for everybody. I know that my position might be controversial, please help me make the game better."
 
Also, note how you should try to, immediately, inlude the people you are talking to. They can help you, you can help them. You aren't engaging each other, but you are tackling the problem. Include them, and ask them to include themselves!
 
And, fourth: Don't hunker down in your position. The moment oyu hunker down is the moment you feel that everybody attacking your position is attacking you and you start attacking them. Take a safe distance from all of your arguments. And, if you realise that you are wrong, take a step back. You aren't loosing if you got the best result for everybody!
 

Criticism doesn't equal attacking something. You can criticize in a polite way. I have never seen something good coming out of anything that startes with "your s*** is s***." While having a discussion in of itself can be fun, I don't think that's your goal here.
 

Techincally not true, atleast if you are refering to the comment I have in mind.
 

Nothing about death. Just about complaining somewhere else. But please don't misunderstand me, I do not agree with this statement.

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

Lacroix, how do you think privately owned businesses work? Yes, you pay for their gas. Or did you think that the money sent to them in exchange for their games they make goes to someone else? That money is called "income". It pays "salaries". Salaries enable people to buy gas.
 
And this is why I find your posts to utterly lack any credence.
 
Regards,
Ken

Wiggum15,
 
A small piece of advice. It's free, so it's worth exactly what you value it. You ask a lot of questions, but you cloak them in criticisms. Some criticism is constructive. Yours is not.
 
A point: "Then why dont they hire new people with better skills ?" (That's from you, just a few posts up.) I don't care about the rationale behind the statement, just the statement per se.
 
- You are on a forum paid for by BFC. They are a small company. The money to support this forum is money which is not going to get a muffler replaced. It is money which is not going to replace that old furniture they got when they got married. It is money which is not going to buy a better Christmas gift for their daughter. It is money, literally, out of their pocket.
- Other companies support forums. Other companies have a far greater budget. Yes, $1,000 is valued differently. Ford (or Daimler) would think nothing of a $1,000 expenditure. How about you?
- You are a guest. As am I. If I went on Intel's forums and demanded that they use AMD cpu's, I would (probably) be banned. Rightfully. As a guest in someone's home I act with deference and civility to my host. But maybe my concept of civility differs from yours.
- Your statement, above, presupposes several insulting assumptions.
-- BFC doesn't have sufficient skill. There are, what, six BFC employees? Just name them and state they are incapable of creating a game the way it should be done. Your passive aggressiveness would at least transcend to outright aggressiveness. It would be more honest that way.
-- Other people do have the right skill. ("You can't do it, but someone else can." That's more insulting than just saying "you can't do it.")
-- BFC (again, just name the decision makers; it's simpler) is too ignorant to recognize the need to hire other people.
-- BFC is too cheap to hire other people with better skills. The assumption is that the budget is there, BFC is just hording the money.
-- Other people with those skills exist (that is a foundation of your initial insult)
-- Your idea of how a game should be created is better than BFC's idea
-- Your idea of how to run a game company is better than BFC's idea
 
Now, that's a pretty surface level dissection of your insult. I, for one, do not take anything you write seriously.
 
I suggest, again for free, that you consider criticisms a bit more before you make them. It is easy to criticize that which you have no idea how to do. That demeans you, as your posts here have done. If you had created a company and successfully released several games, your criticisms, as insultingly as they are delivered, would have some validity. As it is, they have no validity and are merely insulting.
 
Regards,
Ken

Wiggum:
 
1. Please don't derail this thread and cause the topic to be closed.
2. Just because something CAN be improved doesn't mean it NEEDS to be improved.
3. There is NO perfect game. Anywhere. Every single one can be improved.
4. Yes, I'd like a little better pathing/formation in CM...but it is so minor that it is only a tweak, not a "bug".
5. Things that I think are "tweaks" are not things I think "need(s) to be fixed."
 
My post was to point out the technical limitations of home computers and the ramification of a 16-fold increase in action spots. Also, if I had to place each man, the game would not be playable. It is a very well done balance of detail vs. playablility right now.

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

Aurelius,
 
Please re-read my post. Am I defending BFC? Perhaps. I was trying to let Wiggum15 know why his posts don't carry any weight.
 
Am I mad if someone calls me a fanboy? Not at all.
 
Am I a fanboy? Maybe you think so.
 
Shrug.
 
As a counterpoint, look at Lacroix's post, just above. He quotes me and adds a "lol". Why? Because he does not have a rational counterargument. Lacroix is another one to whom I give no credence. His posting history has caused this. Criticism is acceptable, even desirable to improve the game. The negativity expressed by several, like Wiggum15 and Lacroix is counterproductive.
 
Back to your point, Aurelius.  I will not stand by silently when I see posts which are counterfactual. I try to reply to posts with the same level of respect and maturity as they are made. Look up my posting history. Find where I say this game cannot be improved. Find where I do not support ideas to improve the game. There is a world of difference between trying to improve something and just tearing it down. Yes, this forum can get defensive against inflammatory posts. However, this forum also allows those inflammatory posts...for the most part.
 
Irrational, immature, insulting, and inflammatory posts should not be accepted. Defending BFC? No. I am defending a game system I enjoy. I will not passively watch a few malcontents poison a forum without pointing out their falsehoods and distortions.
 
Regards,
Ken
 
Edited to add: As a beautiful counterpoint to everything Wiggum15, Lacroix, et al., have posted, look at this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119875-worrying-60mm-mortar-behavior/page-1
 
We have a criticism of behavior which is specific and it includes what behavior was expected. A member of BFC's team checks it, finds it has merit, and posts an internal report about it. And then provides feedback to the OP about it. This is just one of hundreds of threads which prove how distorted are the statements posted by Wiggum15 et alia.

Wiggum15,
 
A small piece of advice. It's free, so it's worth exactly what you value it. You ask a lot of questions, but you cloak them in criticisms. Some criticism is constructive. Yours is not.
 
A point: "Then why dont they hire new people with better skills ?" (That's from you, just a few posts up.) I don't care about the rationale behind the statement, just the statement per se.
 
- You are on a forum paid for by BFC. They are a small company. The money to support this forum is money which is not going to get a muffler replaced. It is money which is not going to replace that old furniture they got when they got married. It is money which is not going to buy a better Christmas gift for their daughter. It is money, literally, out of their pocket.
- Other companies support forums. Other companies have a far greater budget. Yes, $1,000 is valued differently. Ford (or Daimler) would think nothing of a $1,000 expenditure. How about you?
- You are a guest. As am I. If I went on Intel's forums and demanded that they use AMD cpu's, I would (probably) be banned. Rightfully. As a guest in someone's home I act with deference and civility to my host. But maybe my concept of civility differs from yours.
- Your statement, above, presupposes several insulting assumptions.
-- BFC doesn't have sufficient skill. There are, what, six BFC employees? Just name them and state they are incapable of creating a game the way it should be done. Your passive aggressiveness would at least transcend to outright aggressiveness. It would be more honest that way.
-- Other people do have the right skill. ("You can't do it, but someone else can." That's more insulting than just saying "you can't do it.")
-- BFC (again, just name the decision makers; it's simpler) is too ignorant to recognize the need to hire other people.
-- BFC is too cheap to hire other people with better skills. The assumption is that the budget is there, BFC is just hording the money.
-- Other people with those skills exist (that is a foundation of your initial insult)
-- Your idea of how a game should be created is better than BFC's idea
-- Your idea of how to run a game company is better than BFC's idea
 
Now, that's a pretty surface level dissection of your insult. I, for one, do not take anything you write seriously.
 
I suggest, again for free, that you consider criticisms a bit more before you make them. It is easy to criticize that which you have no idea how to do. That demeans you, as your posts here have done. If you had created a company and successfully released several games, your criticisms, as insultingly as they are delivered, would have some validity. As it is, they have no validity and are merely insulting.
 
Regards,
Ken

Map sizes have increased. We can now have 16 square km maps. That is significant.

Wiggum:
 
1. Please don't derail this thread and cause the topic to be closed.
2. Just because something CAN be improved doesn't mean it NEEDS to be improved.
3. There is NO perfect game. Anywhere. Every single one can be improved.
4. Yes, I'd like a little better pathing/formation in CM...but it is so minor that it is only a tweak, not a "bug".
5. Things that I think are "tweaks" are not things I think "need(s) to be fixed."
 
My post was to point out the technical limitations of home computers and the ramification of a 16-fold increase in action spots. Also, if I had to place each man, the game would not be playable. It is a very well done balance of detail vs. playablility right now.