KNac

OMG, is much simplier than that. Setup a battle in CMBB (or CMAK) and setup a similar battle in CMSF. I know, different eras, but do it proportionally, it can be done mroe or less. Now play both battles in a similar and you will see which is the result. Flaws exist, but are NOT as bad as some want to belive. P.S: Shooting through terrain IS NOT happening *all the time*. Repporting issues is fine, doing it a negative retoric way is unnecessary. Peace!

Yeah same here I ahd a similar problem in Hammertime, so we are 3 now

level of detail, the different levels the game use, if you see the soldiers being drawn very bad at long distances... try vsync off maybe it's better that way as Hev suggest.

it may have to do with adjusted LOD

On a related note: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=000426

I'm trying to enjoy the game, and I don't see that stuff to happen as usually. I usually don't look specifically for it, I actually can enjoy the game. Fair points made anyway, we all know (and knew before the patch) stuff would still happen.

it is working but i doubt your card can do it, you shouldn't be able to play with these settings with that card. anyway, maybe there is a way to enforce AA, are you sure it's ON on the card settings?

Alt+P I think; if not check ingame hotkeys

the average officer don't have to babysit every trooper at their charge neither but, i don't agree with the statement this thread makes that's what i pointed out about infantry firefights lethality, I specially think uncons are too accurate, specially when under fire & supressed. again i'm basing my statements on 1.03 or older, couldn't try 1.04 to a good degree yet. IMO US soldiers against Syrian regular army (or republican/special forces) veteran are fine. But when you go below the regular or less mark (greens, conscripts & uncons <veteran) they still absorve too much small arms or small caliber fire & are too accurate when they fire back.

yeah right, 37 lol

I may be wrong, but out of the top of my head, I think red dot does not mean KIA all the time, but more like 'not good enough conditions to continue fighting'. These incldue a lot of WIA. Whatever, I must play 1.04 (haven' played it just a quick etst, unfortunatly my computer OS decided to **** up just before 1.04 was released, didn't lost any important data but had to reinstall it and have lost a lot of time with this ****, oh well), but now that most problematic stuff is being fixed whe should start discuss other aspects of simulation, one that has to do with this all is infantry firefights lethality, accuracy & mroale/supression effects. IMo there is room for "improvement" in these areas, or mroe than improvement, tuning, cause I guess is a matter of changing some constants in the code. May open a thread about this in the enar future. I think other thing that could use some improvement is command delays, C2 & stuff. Apart of the nice flow of information, some delays in orders would be nice. But maybe we have to wait until WWII for this.

agp aperture does help obviously if your card is runs on AGP bus lol. most graphic cards now run on pci-e

these 111 maps are 33 maps in reality right? in any case, 'awfull' amount of maps! good job

one of the reasons i bought directly from BFC was to avoid that, I hope is not the reason cause then I'm really pissed off

... you are slave to your own words, release it!

new drievrs(WHQL signed) + 1.04 (better terrain rendering) may fix the question a big deal, justw ait soem hours

I think they are in the ONLY path. Some people "doesn't get it".

If you zoom in is much betetr but abit annoying not being able to map while zoomed out. Fix or somefink!

some kind of auto-pause w/ RT has been suggested allready, but that's not the same as WeGo. Personally I'm fine with pausable RT youc an pretty much replicate WeGo that way. let's hope soemthing is done for 1.05 in that department.

Yair predesignated AREA targets, I think he is refeering to. Not untis you can't see cause obviouslly you shouldn't know is there! But you can use cover arcs if you supect an enemy in behind that corner so it won't be distracted by a far away enemy. 1.04 is lloking good, now we just need to get our hands on it

No, the amount of data is the same but is shared as it goes contrary to WeGo, when you must transfer a minute worth of data instantatlly. Considering you have a broadband connection it's not a big problem to tranfer that data, the game must be unplayable on analogic modem though.

just wait some hours and you will be able to check yourself (i hope)

If I recall it right, Steve said in soem thread that Charles was looking fordward into multiproccessor optimization etc. There are few applications (at least in the more general audience and gaming community) which take real advatage of multicores yet, you can observe this cause single core proccessors with an higher clock cycle a lot of times give better performance than multicore ones which have a lower clock cycle. But is a natural steep that have to be done, afterall parallel proccessing is quite old and have been there since the beginning, the assault to home computers was a matter of time. Splitting the syrian squads would be just a workaround, with no dealys in game (a 'non-feature' which hasn't been discussed much, probably cause there are bigger problems now) it would be unrealistic, and in anyc ase as I have said, it's only a workaround. Better let's wait for a more pwoerfull AI which can bring the AT asset fordward and seek better cover, and let's no do new problems out of nothing.

#1 is the 'exit objective', has been quite demanded and I do hope it's on their list. #2 sounds very nice, dynamic objectives. Not only based opn time maybe too on casualties or other stuff. and as for #3 should be easy to do, like the reinforcements messages. But by far, I agree with dan, StratAI needs much more triggers. I really like the path BF has taken, scripted strategic AI plans are easier on their end and also give more control to scenariod esigners, as getting a good stratAI would be a painfull work (even harder than TacAI and we allready see how much problems there are with that). But for this tow ork nice we need a wider variety of triggers and options; it would be really helpfull in case of QBs too. This coupled with dynamic objectives as you suggested would give any scenario designerall what they need. I hope all this is in their list, I'm sure it has been suggested on the internal forum allready as it's not hard to see. Soemone should point out Steve to this thread though hehe