Truppenfuhrung

In the revised version, you should include the meaning of the "+" symbol:

And blaming the abstraction when abstraction is not involve is a useless open discussion.

That's a very good point. Logistic and maintenance are often underlook. And the Azarakhsh fighter is simply reverse engineering from quite old planes (Tomcat, Phamtom).

Thanks for the answers !!! And now I hope that all the whining about the abstraction will stop !

Maybe the Iranian air force could be a little bit more relevant than Syrian air force (which is totally absent)... http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/army.htm

We drive on the right but we are governed on the left [ August 14, 2007, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: Truppenfuhrung ]

P.S.: As a quebecer I can tell you that life here would be much more better if USA would have won the war of 1812...

If we take the following screenshot: 1-Bug ? 2-Abstraction ? 3-The shot simply come over the wall from a unit on a higher ground ? --------------- If we take the following screenshot: 1-Bug ? 2-Abstraction ? --------------- If we take the following screenshot: 1-Bug ? 2-Abstraction ?

I think that the last time a US Army assaulted trenches, it was during the Gulf War. It was a one side victory... Conclusion: Trench warfare vs. US Force is a bad idea...

CMx1 LOS had more abstraction than Cmx2... If CMx1 LOS was fine, CMx2 LOS should be top notch when the bug will be patch.

"Combat Zone" on the Military Channel is also a great source of inspiration for people who want to design their own scenario.

Taken straight from the manual (p.4): Unlearning Combat Mission Gamers familiar with the original Combat Mission series will quickly figure out that we haven’t spent 3 years simply redoing what we already did. Instead, when we started working on CM:SF we decided, from the start, that nothing was sacred. We set out to build a better game engine and anything we felt holding us back from pushing forward was changed or abandoned completely. Yet at the same time we tried very hard to preserve the core of what made the original Combat Mission great. The resulting game probably has, feature for feature, more differences with the earlier Combat Mission games than you might expect to see. It will probably take some time to really get used to the differences, though we are confident that once the initial surprise of how different the game is you’ll be fine. Just like many of you were fine playing Combat Mission for the first time after years of wargames that looked and felt like paper and dice board games. Back then we called the process “unlearning”, so perhaps now we should call it “re-unlearning”! --------------- Think about that before bashing the game... [ August 13, 2007, 11:02 PM: Message edited by: Truppenfuhrung ]

Let says that CMSF simulate the reluctance of army to drop shell on a "target" without having the proper intelligence. Seem fair.

In the "user panel" you can have a very detailed damage report for each vehicle.

Assuming that the Syrian are using Ak-47, maybe 200m is to far. AK-47 are not very accurate. Just like sub-machine gun squad in CMBB, it's only efficient at very close range. I could be wrong...

yeah, that feature was very useful to efficiently use your firepower. I don't know if this feature can be implemented.

Now you have all that information straight in the "user panel". Stats like armor thickness is far less relevant in CM2 than CM1.

yes !

I tough that this thing was indicated by the green dots :confused:

What's the meaning of the "green cross"? Indicating that the unit is "ok" ? I search the manual but I found nothing.

Same thing for me. I was a unconditional fan of WEGO. But right now I enjoy much more the RT. RT give you more flexibility and with the pause function, you don't really need to rush your orders. The only drawback: no replay. So you can miss something on the battlefield, just because I focuses something else.

I disagree with the score. Sure, the game is not perfect but as far as I'm concern, I'm confident that the patches will produce a high quality product (just like CMBB or CMAK). I also really don't understand why they complain about the graphics...

Excellent! Thanks for this explanation! I may add:

bump

Personally, I don't really need the "full replays" when I play RT. Just the last 60 second or even the last 30 second would be fine. In RT, a replay function would be nice to precisely see what happen on the battlefield. Specially when the units are scattered across the war zone. P.S.: I suggest a reply in single player mode. Not multilayer. [ August 10, 2007, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: Truppenfuhrung ]