Janster

yeah, seriously! And as for the arty interface.. Its nice to have the options, but sometimes I just want those freaking mortars to start shooting. Rest of the UI is terrible atm, its nowhere near what we need to use this game on a RTS level. Janster

Bingo! Giving us RTS should mean we have proper RTS controls.. Atm...have you tried the arty interface?? It's a monster! Janster

Unless its static defense we're talking about..the AI will not engage my forces or move or basically do anything in QB.. Janster

No, they don't have to remove it, nor does rushing help you in this game. Stop being silly. They just need to make sure the UI supports their new idea of CM. Janster

As I was trying to get a mortar round off, having to wade through 5 sets of selections, It struck me... They've happily snuck this game into the RTS category now... So, your up against a whole new slew of mortal enemies on the battlefield. - Company of Heroes - Close Combat Iron Cross - numerous ww2 RTS You know, when you took the step into the RTS league...it is wise to know the tools they use to control your forces. It is not anymore possible to be stuck with turn based command systems. I need 'lasso' to be able to rope units and tell multiple where to go. I need simple and quick ways of ordering arty strikes I need to know my units can fire on targets, without me giving them targeting. I need shift + click waypoints I need right click + drag ability to change facing of units. I need none of the submenues, they must ALL go, in return for a more simple and faster command system. Important orders need to be in my face, so that I can quickly order multiple units in the heat of combat. There is tons more aswell. You have already games that set the standard, when it comes to RTS. Don't try to start from scratch, instead take what they have, and build on it. Your an RTS now, its time to wisen up, and get sharp. Janster

Arty Wizard - A bit cumbersome yes? not sure why I have to wade through menues just to get some arty off. Turnbased its not so bad, but as this is now a RTS, its simply too slow. Janster

I had 4 of my M1's on the first campaign mission stand there and take a serious pounding. Given they did shoot the enemy tanks they saw eventually..but they did not put supression fire on enemy units in plain sight, nor did they fire anything at them. Secondly the gun carriers where brought out, who did just teh same..only when I gave manual targeting orders did they fire. Basically, the infantry I placed nearbye saw the enemy quite ok, but obviously they didn't tell anyone Janster

Yeah, I have some real issues understanding this noe TOE thingie they got going. Obviously this game is a step towards the hardcore... But oi, but seemingly your trying to reinvent the wheel, and ignore ANY lessons learned from previous Combat Missions. This is can be very dangerous...and suddenly you have a Master of Orion III thing going, where nobody understands where your going. Quick Battle and buying units was THE core of Combat Mission... Scenarios sucked and I didn't like preset forces. As for how units work together in war, and stuff... Dudes, its sometimes called Battlegroups and stuff, thats where war gets nasty, and you use what you have at hand. It's ridiculous to say that, oh noes, sorry, but these units only play with these other units...but not with those units...sorry. But seriously ..don't you think you've seriously gimped your Quick Battles??????? I've tested the diffrent forms, its NOT that many diffrent troop layouts... And why I can't have that -1- Abrahams as fire support in a scenario is just not going well with me... Command and control is not that rigid that they won't deploy a single Abrahams, or for that fact, use one that is AT HAND. I doubt they will go...OH NOES; it doesn't fit with the TOE, so you can't come and play with us. Silly silly Janster

Harsh tones from me, but you must be able to understand the sheer AMOUNT of hours that Combat Mission Normandie and Barbarossa brought me and my merry gang of CM'ers here. When I remember the fun of the multi-part battles we used to have..and the buying part where I had to think HARD on what to get, and what just sounded cool to have. Now, multi-part campaigns are no more for MP play, neither is ability to choose my own units. And neither is random maps.... now its all pre-designed squads/companies, that we play with. That might be fun a few times, but it will get OLD VERY fast .. Please, you gotta accept these facts. Janster

Hello.. Windows Vista here, campaign doesn't last 1 minute before crashing. Quickbattle usually lasts about 15 mins.. Ze gameh is not stahble at all , thank you. Janster

I'm going from being hopefuly to downright sceptical and upset about this game. I just had a show of it infront of my friends, for future sessions, and here are some comments. 'ugly' 'slow' (we're talking serious hardware here) 'wtf no buyable troops?' 'whats the point with action when we can't enjoy or plan anything' FFS they are trying to compete with Starcraft II, your gonna set yourself up to fail. Janster

Damn this game sucks. Cheesus talk about 4 wasted years... I just tried to show my other CM friends the game..and they all agree this just plainly sucks. You've taken ALL the lessons learned from CM and just thrown them away.. Its like starting back to basic... Dudes, I hoped for progression here... Shame I cannot ask for a refund, this was wasted money Janster

So we're doomed to have the same force makeup every MP game.. Do you see where that might go, in terms of replayability? I like it when I can buy my troops, you get more attached to them... Now all I want is just a lasso to rope and tell my troops to go there and and attack. Janster

Yeah, same here, when you give those orders in CM you have to hope they will be valid for the next 60 seconds. Asking us to react on split second decicions for 50-100 men and tanks is just too much. I just makes me want that 'lasso' function Company of Heroes have, and just order all units to -go there and attack all on the way- But since I don't have it, and orders are cumbersome to give...RT just was a silly silly decicion for MP. Really guys, why do you change a winning plan? Janster Hub, no WEGA is NOT RTS with enforced pauses... It actually forces you to plan ahead...while RT forces you to plan on the fly. There is a BIG BIG diffrence.

quick...easy... wow, I guess I should compare it to Starcraft II then? Nothing is quick'n'easy with this game...why the heck unit selection should be is just silly. Janster

Urk realtime for the pvp variant... Sigh..it's hard to deal with so many units on a realtime scale, things are over in seconds, and having to wade through menues will mean my troops are just ...that much dead. Janster

Yes it does, its your only competitor, and you both model modern combat. While you might be more detailed, its the same squads, troops and CnC being modeled. Look, the game might have many cool ideas, but you just gotta get that troop purchase back, its not gonna be flexible enough in MP. Golden rule is this = let the players have the option to choose. Options are good. Janster

sigh. Steel Panthers III modeled modern combat, with the purchase units option. You've taken away this feature, and seriously gimped your multiplay ability. Whatever realism qualms you have, you should have as gamedesigners seen what realism to have and not have. WW2 online have almost made it so that we have to walk from Berlin to get to the battle, ...realistic, YES, boring YES.. last point. Realistic mix? units are ofen put into battle depending on what they have at hand, they don't wait for a proper 'mix' . Janster poster below is on the target tnx

CM had right click menues which I found VERY useful. It had a pathing system that was great, and a way to see my plan before I sat it into motion. I did give it a chance, I bought it. However not being able to buy troops is a serious step backwards. Janster

Can I have both please? I like my scones with my tea.

OI, I can only play quickbattle with fixed troops!!!! How on earth is this gonna be fun when I play against people? So basically I'm stuck with the same every time? There aren't that many options in quickbattle you know... hmm.. I question this design, and if its removed due to realism, then you've made a poor choice..a VERY poor choice of people to listen too. Also, important commands hidden inside submenues = bad VERY bad hotkey for inf movment = o hotkey for vehicle movement = u doh? So far, it looks cool, but fails to deliver gameplay sorry Janster

I'm currently wanting to play some operation style games with some friends, and find that we like the game best when the maps are at their largest... Now we usually make our own maps or modify smaller ones, but latly I've been wondering if there really is NO max sized maps, particularly topographical out there?.. I don't like scenarios, cause I want to get the equipment I need myself for the battles, so all we want is good clean maps that offers a good challenge... As for the random generator, it really isn't any good. Hope somebody have some ideas.. with regards Janster

Actually, the game does push limits, as the normal first person shooters arent based on 3600x4000 meter areas like I play in operations(exept Flashpoint and it aint a graphical monsters either) they can afford to tune up gfx that much, but if you did that in combat mission and played the largerst operation types, you would crawwwwwl. I have a amd1200 512 mb + gforce 3 64 mb and it runs only well on the operations, of course it cruises on the battles, but battles arent what this game is about..its the operations that kicks ASSSSS with regards Janster

I'm pretty impressed by this discussion, and im gonna add my 5 cents to it. It seems to me that the 41 offensive proved that good trained men can win the day over inexperienced men and that tanks and guns altough having effect, are not the primary key to success. The german army in 41 was equipment wise and technically inferior to the russian one, as the russians did have better tanks, more of them, and somewhat better small arms and guns. Later on for all the vauntet guns and tanks, the german army lost because the trained experienced men where gone, lost due to the inevitable attrition that is war, and being unable to replace them. While I have little else to add, I must admit that russia's deal with Japan, during 41\42 where Japan agreed not to attack Russia, was more or less a masterstroke, allowing them to transfer troops and ignoring the eastern areas for a while. This shows how good the russian diplomacy was at the time, and the german-russian treate before the war was again in my eyes, another time buying affaire from the russians, seeing they were not in anyway prepared for a war. I noticed a what if book in the stores recently, with stories about what would have happened if germany had won the war. I belive myself from seeing the political chaos that was germany back then, that it would have simply ripped itself apart, as too many 'strong' men wanted a place in the sun. The dog eat dog politics must have been hell for the german commanders... But then again, other nations proved not to be that much better... With regards Janster

I can't remember where I have that stat from, but remember that this was in terms of dead shermans and dead tanks, I doubt there were from pure tank vs tank firefights, I belive the allied called in airplane strikes to deal with tanks more than just using their own tanks... Altough I really have no clue here..