leakyD

Link to screenies was in comments section: http://s209.photobucket.com/albums/bb104/charhal/CMBN/

From this announcement: http://www.battlefront.com/community/announcement.php?f=124&a=406 Is this gun 7.5cm or 15cm? PS- trenches look REALLY good... Thanks, gang!

Didn't think, hence the question if Wine was up to snufff yet. Maybe someday... I'm partial to Bootcamp, then making VM's from the bootcamp partition (to backup, etc). Glad to see BFC support both platforms, but for those whining for dual license, just go get a WinOS and use Bootcamp. You'll actually save money after a couple of modules.

You can get WinXP home for less than $100 off eBay or Amazon. Heck, buy a dead PC off eBay for $50 (or less) w. the product key on the unit. Grab an MSDN ISO and install w. key. All good. 100% legit. And, once installed in a VM, just back it up onto external storage. I have a bunch of different VM's on my home office NAS. Only 2-3 are on laptop at any given time. Need a diffent OS? Swap VM's. My laptop dies? Resurrect laptop and copy VM over. Done. Granted, VM's don't work w. Bootcamp (VMware let's you MAKE VM's from Bootcamp - if that makes sense), but you can reinstall the MS OS onto Bootcamp partition whenever. There is no "license tied to computer" condition. It's Bootcamp, baby! Being somewhat tech savvy can help avoid the MS OS hegemony.

"Base" unit cohesion thresholds are so nebulous that's it almost impossbile to define! I feel unit cohesion should be circumstantially dependent: Training? Environment? Leadership? Historical Timeframe? Orders? Moral? Game Battle Type? If one wants "realism" play a scenario (or agreed upon QB) made for such. Want to go balls out and fight to the death? Open-ended QB. I love playing both. With open-ended QB's, once in a while, I pull out of overwhelming odds when player/AI makes mistakes. Pretty dang satisfying. (QB AAR was a great example). For realism, I'll play a scenario made-as-such vs human. NOT easy! Both are fun, but in a VERY different way...

Um.... Bootcamp? Sure, you need a licensed MS OS. Which, actually, is more $$, but greater flexibility... Anyone tried Crossover?: http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxgames/ Are there still issues w. WINE and 3D modelling?

We have partially deformable terrain, not fully deformable terrain (statement, not complaint). Do multi-level buildings partially deform? Like, losing 1/2 a roof and a wall due to damage, but keeping the rest. With troops still able to man the 2nd/3rd floor and modified LOS due to damage? If so, then yes, I'll have another cup of STFU. Understood it isn't a priortiy (flame vehicles please), but at some point fully deformable terrain will add to the immersion.

Thanks BFC and Tyrspawn for sharing. Not too keen on the AI tank rush, but that's what's H2H is for, right? 2nd battle was MUCH more interesting. Those Marders earned their stripes that day! A few minor quibbles, but I'll take Steve's advice and STFU. Once I'm playing, I'm sure I'll forget whatever it was I was thinking.... Immersion is great. Once (if?) we get deformable terrain (and partially collapsed buildings due to damage), immersion will be AMAZING. In the meantime, going to lose a LOT of hrs playing this.... can't wait.

Not too far off base if NKVD was the one giving the orders. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nkvd OK, maybe a BIT of a stretch, but only a bit.

Rog is in the ballpark with casualty thresholds being mission/situation specific. I'd throw in nationality (Certain countries have a higher tolerance for casualties, ex. Russia), and/or unit training/experience as well. I'm sure there are "base" human psychological/logistical thresholds under "normal" operations, but I'm confident all of it goes right out the door once your'e in the field. Example: I was stationed with 24ID, Ft. Stewart, GA in the 80's. 3rd Ranger Battalion was stationed in Savannah, 30miles away. We had some ex-rangers in our unit. Speaking with one, he mentioned that, depending on the mission, it was perfectly acceptable for them to have 100% casualty rates, as long as the mission was accompllished. For me, (19yrs old) it was unbelievable. Like, WTF, Roger? But for him, he said it with utmost certainty. I'm pretty sure 24ID didn't have 100% casualty rate as an OP PLAN. Could be wrong, though. For your campaign, both sides had variables. Might be best to do some research on the actual units fighting to get a better idea of their thresholds. Ex: On average, a U.S. green unit is going to be a little more brittle than a recently transferred (from Ostfront) German unit (unless it's filled with 80% Luftwaffe replacements, of course). But as Hurtgen Forest showed, being green sometimes doesn't mean much for casualty threshholds. The situation there dictated a higher U.S. casualty tolerance, regardless of experience. Again, LOTS of variables.

Flame vehicles/fire and tank riders trump REMF stuff. Let's stay focused, people.

Probably the same reason MS nuked Windows Longhorn 1/2 through development. I've been in some some dev cycles and, with creating certain funtionality, you can paint yourself into a corner. You then have the fun task of trying to fix. Sometimes it just make sense to nuke from orbit. It can be the best way to make sure something is truly fixed and scalable. We have, what, 2-3 more iterations of the engine. Maybe more? These are games, not modules (CM:SF was ONE game, with numerous modules). That's, what, 5+yrs or so? That's some serious forward thinking/scalability for a game engine. NOT something that can be created without some time. CM:BN is gonna be good. CM: OstFront is going to be nuts. Worth the wait. Yup.

Damn. I thought you modders had some pull w. BFC?

LOVE the shadows on the M8 and just the overall immersion. Thanks, BFC. The wait has been quite worth it.

did you scan BDU's? the level of detail is amazing...

Also- A late WWII EU module *could* allow for various "what if" TOE, scenarios and vehicles. That would *really* make having a Late War Title worth it.

BMP-T vid:

Whoa.... Those Russkies got some pretty interesting hardware coming down the channel...

um, is this for real? http://www.imz-ural.com/downloads/movies/Gear-UpW.wmv Or a publicity stunt? http://www.imz-ural.com/gearup/

Nice pic. Takes the BTR-D to the next level. I think I'd like to take a 1 of these + 3 bmp3's up against a Bradley platoon anyday of the week.

Yup. It would certainly be worth the wait to have as many NATO/continental forces possible represented before/when a Russian Module is released. Remember, Poland is (slowly) upgrading to Leopards as their MBT. http://armyreco.ifrance.com/europe/pologne/pologne_index_materiel.htm Any future conflict w. Poland/Eastern Europe would seem to have a mixture of Red and Blue weaponry. I would not be surprised if more Eastern European countries are "upgraded" to NATO standards as time moves on. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/?s=poland+mbt

Today Georgia. Tomorrow, Ukraine. You heard it here first, folks. Germany, wisely, said NO WAY to Georgia (and Ukraine) in NATO. Hmmm.... perhaps the Germans have a better understanding of Russian resolve than the rest of us? Nah... history will teach us nothing. The US NEEDS Russian support to couter Iran. Russia will exploit this as much as possible. Watch how this plays out, especially if Obama gets elected.

Great pics and links..thanks again for sharing... Yup. Interesting unit observations, and LOADS of reference material for modders of future modules. I love the pic of the priest.... does this mean we're going to get priest power-ups/healing AKA "Age of Empires"?

I can't believe no one has mentioned the next Starcraft yet.... Fallout and Diablo, but no Starcraft.... Are you all nuts? Or am I a ****? Wait....don't answer that..... edit - wow... I didn't know d'ork was a bad word!

Russia is not the Evil Empire. After what they went through in WWII, I think their...concern... with their borders is completely justified. Manipulating situations so military units can intervene is something the U.S. is exceptionally skilled. Remember Grenada? Nice easy operation for the U.S. to flex it's muscles and get much needed practice at invading countries. Oh, I mean, we had to save the children, my bad! It'll be interesting to see how US/UN/NATO politically reacts to this incident. Will the West have the political wherewithal to actually enforce anything *against* Russia? My guess is, probably not. Subsequently, US/NATO will be a little more ...delicate... with their political/military machinations in the "near abroad".