KNac

no idea lol all was guessing Phillip you got a point, but the time would be variable on: - force size - player 'clickfest' hability

in multi, if your opponent (or you ) fail to follow the rules. ie. i say "gotta pause a minute, need to go to wc" and issue orders even if we agreed to not do so. yes i know it sounds stupid but all can be possible haha, going 10 times during a game to the wc would be strange, to say the least

As I udnerstood in the firsts posts the issue is being able to give commands while paused, not pausing itself. Pausing at elite is ok, as, yes, we have to deal with things like phones and blahblah. But being able to give orders while paused rests attractive to elite mode. But in any case, no one obligues you to give orders, and if you play multi you can agree with your opponent to not pause/give orders while paused. A Veteran+ mode would make things easier though and solve any "cheating".

Please, remember the game is center around "conventional" -asymetric- warfare, not based on guerrilla, insurgency and occupation/stabilizitaion warfare. When the invassion of Iraq happened, not much of this unconventional fighting had a deep impact in operations, it all started, mainly, after the invassion and when the "shock" of the invassion had passed away. The inclussion of all this is very clever and visionary, but we shouldn't make it one of the main issues of the game, IMO. Anyway, I see an incoming exploitation by scenario makers of this additions to the game engine.

Why? Not exactly... A part of heli-borne forces could be reinforcements or other forces entering the battle later in the game.

I can't seem to run the demo, it opens and a screen showing "loadingl" or soemthing like that appeirs, i can ehar the music and even the mouse passing over menu options but I can't see ****. But well, I'm running Win Vista so who knows, may be soemthing to do with that.

you can use pausing, and i think we-go system is still present, so what's the problem? if someone wants to play realitic and not having a whole day to decide what to do in 1 min real-time, he can play this way; and if you want to play it like chess (w/o counter ) you can.

Woot! I suppose moer dirty would be nice. Also the light is very bright, is on porupose? It's desert so as John Kettler has explaiend it may be. Not really at +1 scale, check the doors and the windows, they are proportional to soldiers and vehicles. Probably are palm trees which are smaller.

Only for the minority that actually believes such things matter.</font>

Oh nice, extra stuff then!

Not really, decreasing selling figures could be a cause of: - People who bought earleir games and didn't like the game/game system, and decided to not buy more games of the series, or even ones who got tired of it (these exist even if sounds impossible). - People who were not interested in the scenarios being done (discussed in the thread, also applies to CMAK) - People who decided not to buy them because they considered the imrpovements or additions weren't enought and they had enough with previous games. - Not effective marketing, for example, if I read "CM: Afrika Korps" I may think: "oh a limited game about 41-42 campaing, it doesn't sound interesting to me" and don't think that it includes posterior stuff. Rare but possible. - Others that I can't think now.

Let me guess the answer... IED usage is part of insurgery fighting and is out of the scope of the game. Something along these lines So mines (AT/AP) will have to do it.

Is not gonna happen; it has been discussed a lot of times and it is not going to happen. No matter what we want or what we say, a lot of reasons have been given, and BFC thinks that is it more profitable for them to go for a less-moddable game. Sequoia that's a good point but a part of the 3D model, there is need to research and coding aspects of each vehicle, is a lot of work. But, it would be cool and is a good idea if BFC did some polls like "which vehicle would you like for next mini-addon" and give some possibilities, and the more chosen ones would be selected, if enought people preorders them (this addons would be only available via download), then they would build it. Even allowing external teams to do most of the work while they control the quality of the product. Hey, is like all the episodic hype that has been going on with a pat of gaming industry, I'll reserve my opinion about it haha, but well, if people wants to pay for it and they don't stop doing complete games, allright, go for it! Not exactly the same topic, but also a demand of this class: THIS THREAD

What we need, is more REAL competition for BFC, as most of us can affor more than one game each 2 or 3 years, and more if they are like CMX1/2. Too much homework for a small company like BFC. p.s: and i play fps and rt"s" too lol

Is a current discussion in the gaming industry: moddable vs not moddable; or rigid vs open. Froma commercial point of view, with the new BFC strategy, opening more the game goes against this strategy, as they are going to produce main game followed by various expansions. If a game is moddable and open, the value of expansions decrease a lot, and their potential for the public too. So the new commercial strategy, does the possibility of a more opened game system more remote, even. I'm not sure if they underestimate their game (they are the oens who know it better), but I'm sure they are well aware of the degree a game is moddable, and how this can or can't be profitable from a commercial point of view. But if I could sign up for the game to be more open to allow this kind of modifications or make easier meta campaings, well, I'll sign up! Anyway, there may be other methods to allow this degree of modification which could be added if not in the first CMX2 game, in following titles, which do not compromise the current code structure.

Something tells me that this won't be possible, due to the nature of CMX1 (and probably CMX2) code being heavy encrypted and closed. But well, let's hope for a possitive answers by devs

Not really that similar... Modeling the first Chechen war, with the incompetent and underfunded post-USSR-collapse army sending tank collumns into tight streets doesn't sound much more exciting then playing the second Chechen war; seeing bitter but better funded Russian generals kill a few million people and subdue the guerrillas through a mix of sheer brutality, bribery and assasinations. </font>

Not for the direct scenaries but yes when presenting and making the game. I mean, look at CM:SF, BFC looked for a feasible (misspelling?) situation that could happen. Anyway, if it's done I'll buy it for sure, it would be an interesting w/o question.

The operative state of USA-build weapons for Egypt would be lacking to say the least in a conflict like this, as they are dependent on USA for any spare piece or repair, and obviously in a event like this USA would withdraw any support. Indeed they changed from soviet equipment to american equipment because they have become an strategic ally of USA in the zone. So is very unlikely a conflict that this would happen, unless Egypt suddenly changed government. It could be interested but not likely, and I don't know if BFC would be intered in modelling this scenario.

yurch much of these problems will be easy to overcome with bigger maps.

Oh, modifing saved games would be nice, but we know this WON'T happen. So some kind of option to export/import unit info after/before the battle in the map editor would help big time developing campaings etc.

While I think that modding extenses the life of a product a lot, we can see soem differences between each type of game and developing house. I dont see BFC giving away an SDK like any FPS developing company, is not their style and probably would be against their marketing strategy. SO I don't think there is a need for custom vehicles, implementing new models, changing lines of code, etc. but some flexibility would be nice, like being able to change the TOE for a squad, their moreale status, etc. Enhance options to make campaing games more possible. In definitive, make the game more flexible while not totally modable, something more than making new high res textures I think they are doing this to some extense.

This is unvaluable resource, great job! Just went through the 100's series, excellent. On the so much comented 110, I don't know really which is the big problem here. I got it on the second run, what I did was the following: - adavanced with the whole platoon to the house area behind the wooden fence. - split all the squads, then I positioned the teams armed with LMGs on cover, 2 in the fence itself separed enought for the MG to do not pin both if it shoot at one, an other close behind in the open, left of the fence, and an other team in the house at the other side of the road; all pointing at the trench & scattered trees. - the teams armed with SMG and the platoon HQ positioned left side of the fence, should advance sneaking towards the trench. - the LMG teams, even without link to the platoon HQ, can provide enought supressing fire for the assaulting teams and not break if they receive MG fire, even if one does break, there are 3 more teams to provide fire support. - once the MG opens against assaulting teams, you should be close enought to advance towards the trench. just assault with 2 teams while rear teams supress the MG and 2 of the assaulting teams shoot at close range. Result ended with the MG down to one captured man, and only 2 cassualties (none was a KIA). hope it helps. So far this has been enjoyable exercises and very valuable lessons. I've learned to be much more carefull with my troops and one important thing: while I've respect to move on open terrain, I don't fear it anylonger, assaulting enemy defensive positions with green troops was: "WOW, what can you do with veteran troops then!?" Now into 200's series. [ December 29, 2005, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: KNac ]

Well, i find some favours in your setup IMO You lack infantry, at least one armored infantry company should be going with the tank platoon. I think the usual way of operating would be the infantry dismounting close to the city and going forward checking each building, with the APC following close but behind and giving proper fire support, same for tanks. Also, modern APC is not open and gunners are better proetcted against enemy small arms fire. And you haven't said which experience did you give each force. Axis should be conscript or green at most (to reflect how fast they break and their poor markmanship)) and Soviet should be veteran or elite. Try with this and tell us which was the result. P.S: oh I forgot about arty/air support totally, but is difficult to reflect modern air support in CMBB. I think a crack radio mortar spotter could do the job, and 3 o 4 TRPs free to place.

Who announced it?! The only thing I can read is "it would take a little bit to write something like that", but that's not an annoucement, more the contrary hehe