Capt Cliff

Sophistry Dude. The map is still only a grid of squares with each square having a series of attributes for graphics and movement and what ever. BF is not stupid and they would keep it simple for simpler programing and program interface. BTW CMx2 is not a new program ... they used CMSF coding, most likely why there is a problem with armor being too accurate in CMx2. But the basic's for CMSF came from CMAK, or at least a straw horse outline vastly improved (?) or changed..

LOL! Yeah ... CMBB and CMAK works great so no need to post complaints. An forums tend to attract wanna-be playtesters that do nothing but defend the indefensible if their precious game is attacked in any way. So I void such comfrontation and call for FFE with 155mm arty.

The game is missing the corpsman running around helping guys.

One comment. I only do operations in CMx1 and looking at campaigns in CMx2 they are not the same beast. CMx1 operations fight over the same map while CMx2 does not allow you to fight over the same map more than once. The damage to buildings, craters and what ever is not saved. So a CMx2 campaign is a whole new kettle of fish.

Oh come on, give me a break. No air to ground combat?? You can buy aircraft to bomb and strafe but you have no AAA to defend against it???

I don't see the terrain being any more detailed than CMx1 except graphic depiction, how it looks. The requirements, i.e. square area elevation, etc., seems to be the same. So your rationale is incorrect. As far as a diffrent program I don't see that either. I assume CMSF evolved from CMAK. All engineers are lazy and did not wander too far from the main program. They changed and enhanced the command structure, C2. But the map architecture is basically the same, a squre with elevation, a building or rocks or road or what ever to discribe the map square appearence. The map is what we are discussing. Because CMSF didn't have it doesn't make it the standard. Just makes CMSF less compared to CMAK.

Huh? So there's no triple-A except 88mm heavy flak units and MG's on vehicles, right? Boy that looks like a massive oversite. So I need to spend another $55.00 inorder to get 20mm or 37mm flak guns to protect my German units. If it blows down to the Normandy game and not just stays at the Market-Garden level. I say a patch is required. Oh, the USA lacks the .50 cal Quad units, towed and SP M16 HT unit. Yeegads!

Yep ... Brecourt Manor is there.

I have noticed that for quick battles there is no random map generator like in CMx1. There are a few canned maps of different szes that one can chose from or have randomly selected for you. Is it possible to make more maps and add them to this canned listing? How detailed does the new battle map have to be? Do I need to add set-up areas and AI scripting?

I was putting together a quick battle when I noticed that the German equipment list doesn't contact any light flak options. I mean no 20mm Quad and single gun light flak or I couldn't find them. Also there's no flakwagons nor whirlblewinds. If someones found them I'd like to know where to look.

Beats me. Coding most likely. The ability to save the battle map condition. BF Teech Support added to this thread about this issue, on page 1.

No SS?? Didn't 17th SS PGD fight opposite Carentan against the 101st?

The big difference is you can't fight over the same battle map. All damage on the map will not be carried over from Battle 1 to Battle 2. So it does make it difficult to have battles for historical towns that recieved damage over time, historically. Yes, you can create human vs human camapaigns ... but again you can't fight over the same battle area. Well you can but all buildings are healed up and all craters are gone.

Thanks for the explaination. I assumed, badly, that CMBN was like CMAK but with the CMSF system. But it isn't. CMBN is more like CMSF than CMAK, too bad. The inablity to fight over and over again on a certain map is very restrictive. Something not done so much in modern (CMSF) battles but was done in WWII a lot. But then in Afghanistan there are villages that have been fought over a lot. An yes it is in the manual, hand written or scribbled, that if you don't read the manual cover to back you could miss it. But reading a PDF file on the screen I have found to be a real pain. Again thanks for the responce. I can only hope BF expands the games potential rather than rationalizing what is currently there as ... "the way it is".

Let's hope they patch it. CMAK didn't save ko'd vehicles at first, during ops. But they patched it.

I have just read in the rules that damage incured during say battle one does not or is not saved so that when you fight battle 2 the damage to buildings, ko'd tanks and the like is not displayed. If the town was destroyed in battle 1 then in battle 2 it comes back all healed up. Huh? There were many town in Europe that were fought over and exchanged hands many times. St. Maire Eglise, Noville, Caen to name a few. To not have the capability to save the damage incured from battle to battle is inexcusable. This is a severe flaw in the campaign system. If I remember rightly CMBB or CMAK didn't save the KO'd vehicles during operations, but it was fixed.

I just saw the thread and nice that you can build a camapign for PBEM. Wodin, I did download the demo and there were so many un-selectable areas I assumed it had to do with the demo's limited access capability. I also just noticed in the campaign section that you can't fight multiple battles over the same area. Like fighting for St. Maire Egliss. Any damage to the terrain, ko'd vehicles and the like are not saved from battle to battle!!?? Anyone else see this as a problem?

Oh, one other minor item. If your planning to fight over the same town, say St. Maire Egleis, the town damage, KO'd vehicles and the like will not be saved from one battle to the next. Say in battle 1 the town is destroyed but in battle 2 the town reappears all healled!!?? What the ... "Houston we have a problem ..."

Can anyone explain why campaigns are only for single player vs the AI?? In CMx1 we had operations which are great. As a matter of fact I only play PBEM games using operations. Am I missing something that the "operation" is part of the "battle" system, I checked and NO it's not! If the campaign is something new and not a replacement for CMx1 operations why have it only against the AI only? The loss of the campaign/operation feature allowing multiple battle over the same area using PBEM is a serious flaw. If I had known this before I most likely would not have purchased the game.

In CMx1 motars had a minimum range that they could fire, under that and no fire option. But in CMx2 I don't see the same game mechanics. Any one else notice this?

I think backspace clears the target.

Smoke and HE missions should have a seperate ammo load. When the HE mission is shot-off then you have the smoke mission to deploy. But in the Closing the Pocket the German arty will fire everything as HE with no smoke available. Huh? On-board motars had seperate rounds for HE and smoke.

I thought only Russians beserked and only in ASL!! Oh, it was just one guy ... I guess losing his crew caused him to go mad. LOL!!!

Yeah I found that, cool!

Now this is funny. I was playing Closing the Pocket as the German. Near the end I moved a Marder down by the crossroads on the left. When the marder was attacked by a single guy armed with a .45 cal hand gun, he was shooting at the Marder. It was a tank crew from one of the USA KO'd tanks. The bugger charged down to the crossroads and started dueling with the Marder. Well 2 or 3 shoots from the main gun did him in. But this does bring up a point that crews should retreat off the map, when ever possible and not and I mean NOT attack enemy armor with a pistol.