SKELLEN

The screenshots look very impressive and the internal detail on the Priest is great. I hope to see as much detail in other areas now also, (Infantry in particular) with regard to uniform colours and insignias etc, on different nationalities. Also please include winter camo this time for Infantry and vehicles or at least Infantry.

The same filthy customers that pay filthy loads of money to these filthy rich game companies eh?

Charging a fee or placing a limit on what one can d/l is anti-community for a Company that encouraged creativity (scenario editor) and has benefitted hugely through the tremendous amount of voluntary hard work and time/effort put into creating theses Scenarios/Mods. Now you want to thank people for all that creativity by charging them or placing a limit on what they can d/l? I'm sorry BFC but this seems like a kick in the teeth to the loyalty of you fans.

Wait until you try 'To the Volga' if you are brave enough. Processing times can be 10 to 30 mins or more.:eek: Admittedly I never intended to complete the above but I was simply curious about the size of the OP. There are actually two Ops (although being from CMAK) that I can't even run on my computer, but you would think if I can run 'To the Volga' then surely any other OP/Scenario wouldn't pose a problem - :confused:

This is a good site also www.theblitz.org

It's a crying shame seeing so many games ruined by putting graphics above gameplay. If you're going to do a WW2 game at least do proper research on the chosen period simply out of respect for all those gave their lives on both sides. While we're on the subject what's the likleyhood of CM ever making an appearance on P3? I'm thinking making it available on PS network and bringing some real depth (gameplay wise) to the console, if it's even possible.

This may or may not be an issue but if the particular scenario was designed with an earlier version of CM it may be causing incompatibility? Also are you definitely sure this scenario is not part of an Operation, and you may want to double check the scenario itself as it could be corrupted. Bear in mind also Reinforcement slots. Your Tanks won't show up until they are due obviously during the scenario. Are you using V1.03 for CMAK?

I haven't been in the map edit screen for a while now but if I recall correctly then you need to check the year or date settings for your chosen units. As some units only show up on certain years/dates to reflect historical periods they were involved. In the scenario settings screen note the year/date and try a test run for a newly created scenario for example, and then see if you are able to select your chosen units using a different year/date. Someone here may be able to give you the exact date you require, or alternativley, try doing a search either here or on google perhaps.

I never said it was the best way to do something but simply trying to bring one example to your attention. You've heard of tactical play I'm sure and you use your Tank Hunter team etc, when and where your opponent least expects. Obviously pick the right moment and not have units running around like headless chickens. In other words lay an amush in some place or sneak close to enemy through good cover preferably with Leader stealth bonus to remain undected for example. I think you have to remember here that the game is abstract afterall and what if said unit doesn't have satchels, then maybe your unit decides to shoot at tank commander for that important lucky shot. Indeed you can't use follow command on building but that was just an idea on my part (trying to be helpful) for you to use as an alternative to normal targeting i.e. armour. Not trying to state the obvious here but try using a normal cover arc commmand at say 40 meters or so. Just remember what you see on screen isn't everything that could be happening -maybe unit dropped his satchel charge, scratched his head, picked his nose, was daydreaming etc.

but if a squad isnt spotted and in good cover, that will get them spotted, possibly pinned, and then possibly not throw the weapon. When BFC creates a new patch to CMAK they need to add a "use AT weapon" command. [/QB]</font>

Interesting read Tux! It's a shame we don't see more of these from the community as they are great learning aids also I feel. I can just imagine you saying "Sods bloody law" when you lost your Tiger Commander. Looking forward to more and the continuation of the other AAR also.

Engineers will take their pretty little time for sure but several things may be the reason for this such as:- 1) The squad's morale condition 2) Experience of squad 3) In or out of command of leader 4) Out of satchel charges The manual states that "It takes a few minutes (turns) to clear a gap through the mines. The number of engineers and their experience effect their speed in clearing mines." Another thing you could try is plotting a move order with the waypoint placed on the enemy vehicle instead of targeting directly. The distance between you and the vehicle should be no more than 50 meters. Your squad should automaticaly follow the vehicle and assault it - all being well of course. I used the above movement method on a KV tank in CMBB just a couple of days ago and it worked like a charm for me.

I think maybe they've bitten off more than they can chew (so to speak) and underestimated the amount of work involved and required. Saying that, I'll probably be proved wrong and this game will be released when the WW2 module is released for CMX2 to cash in and maximise profits - nothing wrong with that of course, except the extra time required to wait.

What type of Battle are you playing because if you are playing Attack/Defend game then this might explain it? The tanks are obviously lying in wait for you and will seem to appear with no sound contact - that's my guess anyway.

As CaptainBly stated "A wargamer cares about play value, longevity, quality and challenge." </font>

As CaptainBly stated "A wargamer cares about play value, longevity, quality and challenge."

Expect not to need any more patches or maybe no more threads expecting more patches.

The QB system was and is fun sometimes although the random nature of the maps leaves a lot to be desired at times with regard to direction of roads and house positions etc, etc, however I can see why people miss this option in the new game. Obviously the QB system could be improved after nine years but by then CMX3 will be the latest thing no doubt and so the cycle will continue - in relation to missing features, bugs, and new features no doubt, so it is a catch 22 situation for BFC - damned if they do and damned if they don't I guess - nature of the beast.

Isn't there a law against this type of practice (wrongful advertising) as we call it in U.K. but not sure about U.S. though, however I agree it is completely deceiving the public and one might expect better from BFC. :confused:

If you go by what BTS is trying to tell us, the CMx1 game concept HAD to be abandodned, reinvented and made RT if there was ever a successor to the CMx1 series. The evidence from "ecomonic realities" of the CMx1 series seems to support and vindicate their case for doing so. POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS: 1) Market was saturated and satisfied with the intital CMx1 release of CMBO. Subsequent releases of CMBB and CMAK did not justify to either prospective new customers or owners of previous titles that they were worth buying or of any better value than CMBO. 2) BTS/BFC strayed from a winning formula. With each successive CMx1 release, BTS/BFC made changes to the game which made the product of less value and worth to their existing customers/prospective customers. They in effect killed their market by reducing the quality of the game with each succesive release of CMx1 making it less attractive for customers to buy than each preceeding release. NOTE: Unlike the Total War Series or even the Madden football series, BTS/BFC do not know how to repackage the basic same game concept and make it more commerically succesful or at least commercially sustainable than previous releases. I guess they are not good at knowing what their market really want or knowing what a good thing is. The thing I believe that might be the most important issue being overlooked here and resulting in a convincing case against CMx1 being "commercially viable" is ....software piracy! The latest CMx1 was certainly a game to check out!! But it was a double edged sword. But probably most importaat of all. IT WAS A FREAKN AWESOME GAME TO PLAY!!!!!! So what I am suggesting is that perhaps BTS/BFC almost have themselves to blame for not "protecting their investment" and allowing CMx1 to become "just another game to pirate" whose market value subsequently saw it relegated to "baragain bin" status. The tragedy is this: How could they (BFC) have let this happen? </font>

What sand mod are you using? </font>

What sand mod are you using? </font>

It hasn't even been out 3 weeks yet I do think it is funny how eager some people are to see us fail. Oh well, can't please them all, so no point trying. Steve [/QB]</font>

It could have been worse , you could have experienced the Tiger being knocked out by a Stuart - I haven't had the experience as yet but I know some have. -------------------- You can't say civilization don't advance, however, for in every war they kill you a new way. - Will Rogers