Placebo
-
Posts
503 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Placebo
-
-
I actually bought CMBB not to long ago just to see the early war in CM series and i was shocked by the amount of content in it compared to a CM2 game lol I couldnt get into it due to the odd scaling of the infantry i found it to be really unimpressive. I did play a few games as Finland, Italy, and Romania which i hope to see some of those minors in a CM2 east front module or game
I really loved CMBB, there was jsut so much depth/variety in the game, but like you as soon as CMBN came out i could not go back and play it. The new game engine is a whole new level of detail, realism & eyecandy.
-
All this arguing about the pack seems to be happening in a vacuum. Has anyone here actually played the game using the new vehicles yet? How can you have an opinion if you haven't played the game with the new vehicles yet? I just did a QB using Hotchkiss chassis SP guns in bocage country to fight off a US advance and had great fun doing it.
Good point, i downloaded the pack last night, not much time to play but activation was not a problem just have the instructions to hand!!
I can wait to get the new Churchills into action, I like playing as the Brits and they need some extra firepower.
PS Except for the crab that I think i will leave on the beach!!
-
The bulge should be interesting, in terms of the winter conditions and there is a lot of detail about the battles so there should be some good campaigns for it too.
For me when we were spoilt for choice with CNBB, while i was curious to see the poor weapons and formations in 41, it was 43+ that was of real interest with all the great tanks etc.
-
Buck72 - If you read the official line from Steve, the product is over 3 years old and interest does decline for add-ons over time. So to make the work worthwhile in effect you are getting less bang for your buck for these late addons.
Seems fair enough to me if you view it terms of the the lifecycle of the game.
-
Damn can't believe i missed this launch. Will be downloading tonight. My comments on pricing:
1- As long as my wife does not see me ordering it the price is not an issue for me
2- I was really hoping for some more QB maps as it would have added a lot more value for me, but understand the reasoning if it would have delayed/tied up resources for another 2 months.
3- I still love playing the game but is sounds like this is it for CMBN add-ons. I am sure i will be playing for a long time so it has been well worth me paying for all the updates as it has added so much more depth from the initial release. Now roll on the Bulge title and black sea.
-
I do miss jamming in CM2 - I understand the idea that mg's have been made less lethal to simulate this, but it was better having it shown as a jam and a good chance for pinned troops to make a break for cover. (Also changing out the barrels on some mg's would also be a good addition)
-
I also used to be good at assaulting houses in CMSF but quite frankly I've forgotten some of the tricks. Like you give a waypoint at the front of the building with a pause and a target order inside the house, they will stop there to lob some 'nades in and then enter, at which point they will automatically cancel that target.
I will have to try that, I have lost count of the number of pixeltruppen that have wandered into buildings and been gunned down by unspotted/unsurpressed enemy!!
-
When we see the earlier years on the eastern front, I will be expecting the tank platoon flag communications to be fully modelled
-
The game is completly unplayable with these shortcomings.
I need to correct you on one point - the game is completely playable in its current state.
-
Sounds good, I have been wanting to fire up SF for a while now to get ready for the new modern warfare title. I also love playing the Brits in shock force so let me know when it is downloadable.
-
loads more QB maps, the small/med bocage countryside ones are great but I need more!!
-
1 - when will black sea get its own forum page
2- how close is it to release (I believe Sept was very tentitively mentioned some time ago)
There was a great teaser by ChrisND showing some of the vehicles in the new game but it would be great to get some more bones about the game.
-
Seems like a none issue to me, has there ever been a post saying they had used up all their licenses and BF refused to let them re-activate the game?
I can't every recall seeing one, so it is safe to assume BF keep their customers happy.
-
As Steve has told the Beta folks repeatedly (because we've asked repeatedly ) air support has to be either entirely FO controlled or entirely random due to the nature of the coding, which wasn't set up to allow for variations. And Steve sees close air support in WWII to be of such marginal significance tactically that its not worth dismantling the game engine and reassembling just to add a marginal feature. Did I mention the Beta folk had asked this question repeatedly?
Well thanks for asking anyway, you never know with s/w if a change is an easy couple of line of code or a major new dev project. I guess the answer is not to install the hotfix to keep uncontrolled air.
I will give it a try, as stated it may break too many of the current battles but as i have played most already i will see how it plays out.
-
Uhhh.... Steve had said categorically that CMBN would not go the uncontrolled air route. This does not sound right. There may have been limitations to WHO gets to call in what. FOs should no longer be able to call in multiple artillery missions at the same time, for instance. I can't get to the game right now, can someone check to see if its a question of who can direct air strikes and not whether air strikes can be directed at all?
[Edit] - Back again. Apparently this is not a new feature but a new bug and 'corrective action is being taken' - to use their own phrase. Dang, its always something. Murphy's law in action, I guess.
Steve/MikeyD, any chance of making the control of air support a selectable option so people can choose which option, as both sets of code are already written?
-
I have not tested this, but my own experience plus comments from others does suggest that trees do not provide much concealment from aircraft. They should, of course, but the point is that when playing scenarios with air support present I assume all units to be effectively out in the open at all times.
I have found tree cover makes a huge difference, if your troops are in the open either sides planes will be like a magnet and drawn to an easy kill.
I think censorship cut out a lot of horror stories from the front line troops about blue on blue kills from arty and air support. Only anecdotal but I believe it really was common in WW2. Frustrating in the game but realistic.
-
temporary airfield coverings GROG
-
Very interesting YD, I think the CMRT system "gets the job done" in the a user friendly way.
It just never seemed right to me that a FO can call in an airstrike at a grid ref that he must be able to see (works for arty but no laying up rounds for airstrikes) and can pinpoint an area 4m x4m (I know the plane may attack outside that) but it is still way too precise.
-
I am glad it has changed, I think it is much more realistic having them uncontolled.
-
Jon, that is a good idea as i have a couple of PBEM games going so that would get me using the update quicker.
-
Value of upgrades to people is not universal, I have just bought the 3.0 upgrade for CMBN. It was not needed for the game but I wanted to buy my £6 for decals and updated air support.
Not good value for money compared to other games DLC but well worth it as A: I can afford it and B: I love the game and want to get the most out of it.
I do not understand the constant complaining about the business model BF have, you do not need this 3.0 upgrade to play the game so do not buy it if you do not want it. Surely it is no more complicated than that.
-
"Planes in BN and FI work as before. No change with 3.0." -Fizou
"Nope. Forward observers are not required to call planes now. I have bought planes without them and are able to attack. However, FO know when a plane is "comming around" or "preparing"." -Whiterider
So thats 1 vote for as RT & 1 for no change, can anyone give a deciding vote?
-
I may have missed this, but do planes still need to be called in - or as in RT do they act independantly?
-
If he had to aim 150 feet into the air does that technically make it indirect fire artillery!!
error on the new pack flamethrowers specs
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
I was really surprised to see the Brits had a super handheld flamethrower
"Portable Flamethrower Mk 2
Affectionately called the "Lifebuoy" by troops, due to it's circular tank, the standard Commonwealth backpack flamethrower has an effective range of about 100m and enough fuel for 10 seconds of use."
100m :eek: unfortunately its only 30m in the game!