Zemke

This is an excellent read, makes me want to play this scenario.

All small arms accuracy data would be easy to get. Take the percentages of target hits for each weapon from soldiers in basic training or untrained soldiers them compare that to trained soldiers, just go to your locale basic training post and ask for the numbers. Accuracy will go down as stress increases for less experienced troops, also, as well as suppression levels. Earlier I read in this post that hits from 200 meters were right on, that is crazy, if true then the game is way over modeled. Most US soldiers cannot hit a man's head at 200 meters for all the tea in China, and from what I have seen people in the middle east cannot shot for crap. The armies of that region tend to think weapons make the man, not the other way around, in other words if they have good weapons they will do as well. But I would put any western force armed with WWII weapons against them, and I'll bet the results will be almost exactly the same; their armies have poor marksmanship training. Most of small arms casualties take place at 100 meters or less, unless you happen to be charging across the open ground covered by stabilized MGs.

I think anything that gives the player choice in how he wants to play his game is a good thing, you would not have to use it.

The finest German Army ever to take the field crossed the border into Russian June 22, 1941, after that, everything was a struggle to man units. If the Germans had such a surplus of man power, why did they need to change the TO&E of the infantry divisions from nine battalions to six? Army Group Center was fairly well manned in 1944, having been a relatively quite till Operation Bagration kicked off, but the Southern Army Group was bleed dry from almost continous combat after Kursk, and never really recovered.

Oh hell just buy the damn thing, you know you want to.

I thought BF was not going to allow modding of CMSF, or am I wrong?

I have to play the game more to remember all the things I missed or thought should be included...doing that again with the new patch, which works great for me. Oh I remember, the big one for me, I wish so much for a TCIP game of CMSF using WEGO!!! An even better idea, WEGO with variable time increment settings. Where players could chose to vary the time between orders. Say everything from 30 seconds to 5 minutes, 30 seconds for those micromanages out there, and 5 minutes for those hands off kind of guys. It seems with much of the pathing issues taken care of, this could be possible. Oh and show me the kills! Scalp count for my individual units and artillery, I want to properly reward my heroes. [ December 17, 2007, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: Zemke ]

Battlefront is working very hard to correct the related programing bugs, 1.06 is proof of that. I cranked up the game again, and it seemed even better, you are getting there, although my own issues have been design related, and not bugs. I always knew BF would fix the bugs sooner or later. I want so bad to recommend this to my old CM buddies. If I may, will we see more enhancements to the game itself, I know you have said possibly better QB features in the future. I love the suggestion someone made about making Campaigns more like CC campaigns. Are there other features coming in patches or mods in the future? Man I would love to have a cup of coffee and talk to you guys some day.

I have not posted in some time myself, nor have I been playing CMSF. I do appreciate the interaction with the BF staff here, it is non existent with other companies. I think one of the problems with "we the public", is that old saying "familiarity breads contempt". Most of us feel a special kinship with BFC, and the game because we have played CM1 and know the names of the programmers and developers, which leads some to say things here we would not normally say in other forums. BTW, this forum is far more polite that most out there, so even a flamer here would hardly get an eye blink in other forums. I think the reason is as wargamers we tend to be older and more mature people, but that also means a lot of passion about the product and the hobby.

So the faster CPU makes more of a difference? I have read the game DOES NOT take advantage of multi-thread operations, is that true or not?

My point of view is I think BFC has made poor design choices, (and poor marketing ones). I never said get rid of RT, I said fix WEGO, among other things. The main point was give the player more freedom of choice. Don't make me have to play the game the way Steve likes it, or BFC prefers, or young people like play it. I want to play it with the options of CM1, good AI, good tacAI and WEGO against humans. If giving my opinion is whining, then I guess I am whining like a little school girl. I want this game engine to work, I truly want BFC to have a winner. I have read some of Steve comments, and sometimes it seems they or he had a vision where they wanted this game to go without really thinking everything through. Of course, it is easy for us to judge them after the fact and having never sat in and observed the decision making process. I once made the comment on the forums, asking if the same guys who designed CM1 designed CMSF! I mean there are so many great things in CM1 that are not in CMSF, a perfect example is the "scalp count". I have a list of the differences on a sheet of paper that I was tracking all the things CMSF does not have that CM1 had. I after I got on the second page, and three weeks after the 1.04 patch came out I stopped adding to it, because frankly I stopped playing CMSF anymore. It has some very cool things, but I am more of a human opponent player, and playing this game in RT against a human opponent just does not appeal to me at all. I may as well play Command and Conquer or something. And Yes, all this has already been brought up again and again. But you know what they say, the squeaky wheel get the grease. I CAN HOPE BFC "gets it" someday. Now if the WWII game is great, I see sales higher than CMSF, because word will get around.

I am thinking hard about getting a new rig, what would people recommend? I currently have an AMD 3500 at 2.4Ghz and a 6600 V-card, 2 Gig of mem. I want to run the game at the highest video settings and have larger battles. I have a few questions too? 1. Does the game take advantage of dual and quad core processors? 2. I plan on getting an 8800 with 640Mb of memory, but I keep seeing problems with the 8800 series and this game, has that been fixed?

I have tried it twice, the problem with it is when you lose.

Nadin1, Just for you, I think I may stick around awhile...

Maybe I should add a........ 22. Airport security is a joke, done only to make the mass of dumb asses "feel secure". I agree with Mr. Peng on this one. If a determined person really wants to do something, none of that security will matter. The attacker AWAYS has the initiative and will determine the time and place. No amount securty in the world can deter a determined attacker.

Well Nidan1 I just thought I would post what I thought, as everyone else was posting what they thought, now we see what you think about what I thinking, but that is ok because we all will never agree.

21 Things I believe: 1. More freedom is always better than less, in every situation. 2. People get the type of Government they deserve. 3. More security always gets you less freedom, and never gets you more security. 4. Less taxes are better than more taxes. 5. I am smarter than any government. 6. I manage money better than any government. 7. Food is a great motivated for work, (from my Dad). 8. Crime is caused by criminals. 9. Criminals are created by ****ty families. 10. The innocent should always be protected. 11. Buildings can be rebuilt, freedom lost is far harder to re-gain. 12. Individuals are responsible for their own lives. 13. Some people in this world really do need killing. 14. Don't try and tell others how to live their lives, unless yours is perfect already. 15. A liberal education is the key to understanding. 16. The ability to debate and disagree stems from a liberal education. 17. We can agree to disagree. 18. Guns should only be feared by those who wish to impose their views on everyone else. 19. It is better to love, than to hate. 20. It is better to fight, than surrender. 21. Give me liberty or give me death! [ November 08, 2007, 11:42 AM: Message edited by: Zemke ]

As you can see the graphics are a huge improvement, doesn't get any better than this. In this version the pathing AI works most of the time, except for when the driver decides his life is worth more than your orders. LOS/LOF problems have all been fixed. The Infantry model is perfect, and move very fast, shoot quickly and accurately. But, again seem more interested in self preservation, than following my orders blindly. On the plus side you don't see entire Squads cut down in the street either.

The main problem I have had with CMSF is with some design decisions of the game itself. I don't see how going to Real Time was an improvement at all. I like it as an option to draw in a younger crowd more used to that type of game, but as you said yourself, serious tactical play is better suited to WEGO. After all, this is a nich game, and will never have the sales of the larger publishing houses. I think BFC should have stuck with what got them where they are, and not tried make a product that tried to please both worlds, RT click fest and serious wargamers. Other design decisions just seem stupid or very short sighted, for example the Quick Battle format. For the life of me, I cannot understand how or why they came up with such a lame method of doing QBs. The CM1 system was good, not perfect but it worked well, and has allowed CM1 to live long past the life span of most other games. Using a simular system could not have been that hard, and would have been the smart thing to do. Using Syria as the Theater of Operations, even after the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, who thought of that one? If you wanted to do modern, then why not stick with realistic events, and Iraq/Afghanistan are real wars against a real enemy. Only saving grace I can see from doing CMSF modern is perhaps (if they survive), they can get the WWII game right. TCIP play, which I think is the real future of all games, and if you really want to appeal to the younger players out there, then include a well thought out method of online play. I have said from the beginning, that fetures like optional RT or WEGO should be part of the choices allowed players. Have a centralized site to to facilitate online play, simular to Rome Total War or HypperLobby for online flying. Game orders and interface seem poor, a step backward over CM1 in tactical orders options with fewer real options availible. I loved the "Movement to Contact" order in CM1, it allows you to move tactically and you knew your guys would stop, engage and not move anymore. I'm sure it was not included because playing in RT, you can "stop" your forces yourself. Now we are forced to become Stryker drivers or Squad Leaders for all vehicles and squads. How is that an improvement? Why was a "Follow Me" not added? I have seen this request over and over in the forums from very experienced CM players. It is a good idea, would save time and make game play faster, WTF over?? The Order of Battle options in CMSF are weak compared to CM1. You get what you get in CMSF, while in CM1 I can "buy"/"build" almost any type of Task Force. In CMSF I have to mess with the "Equipment Quality" constantly to get the equipment mix I want, and still don't get exactly what I want. Again another example of poor design or decision making, or a lack of CHOICE. What I consider smaller issues related to the internal programing due to the new engine, I think and will be fixed sooner or later. These seem to be the most posted on issues, lack of smoke from IDF, LOS/LOF issues, terrain and so on. I pose the question, if this engine is so great, then why do we have LESS options on play instead of more, why do we seem to be missing several key aspects of CM? Give the player MORE options, not less. Even if the designers disagree with my preferences, don't take out options or orders, give the player MORE options. This can only help sales, no hurt them. Give us more CHOICES. I have been playing CM since 2002, and have a LOT of games under my belt, with 95% against human opponents, either PBEM or TCIP. The current AI in CMSF does will not give this game the "legs" CM had because so much is designed for RT and playing against computer, not human opponents. Human Opponent play is what will give you the word of mouth, and make this new engine great. I cannot count the number of times I have recommended CMBB or CMAK to other wargamers who had never heard of it, and end up buying the game. In it's current state, I cannot do the same for CMSF. I guess I "just don't get it." Zemke [ November 08, 2007, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: Zemke ]

My interest in CMSF has gone from excited to zero. I don't play the game at all anymore. CMSF is NOT what I had expected. BF has a lot of work to do before I would think of buying another product from them. I don't plan on buying future modules either, until WWII comes out. The primary issues I have with CMSF as it is are: 1. WEGO system is broken, taken a back set to RT. 2. TCIP play not possible in WEGO 3. RT is NOT realistic except at the smallest level. 4. Quick Battle system is very weak. The CM1 system game CM long legs and allowed lots or replay. 5. Many smaller problems, like no indirect fire smoke amoung other things.

Well I am NOT spending more money on any new CMSF release, until I see very real improvements from people I know who are old CM players and know what they are talking about. I have not played CMSF in over two weeks anyway, and have no desire to break it out again, it is just not doing it for me. There are way too many things they have screwed up in this game, and I have read post after post from people bringing up real issues and concerns with no response from BF. This game was not ready when it came out and is still not ready, and players and customers keep pointing out issues...and this after four years of development.

It defiantly has potential to be great. Great games take a lot of attention to detail and it is the little things that make them so.

I still have CMBB and CMAK PBEM games going, and frankly spend far more time on CM1 than I do on CMSF. The new "improved" engine of CMSF just does not allow me to have the larger battles I prefer, and the PBEM files on CMSF are so large, (I guess due to the new improved engine).

WEGO is or was the very heart and soul of what made Combat Mission....well Combat Mission. Everything else has been done before to some degree or another. Real Time is not new, and for a war game like this I think a big step backwards. BF doesn't even use the term WEGO, now it is "turn based". Which I don't understand why they also seem to want to distance themselves from the brilliant innovation that was WEGO in Combat Mission. Out of all the things missing in CMSF, this is the most glaring of all. I cannot count how many PBEM opponents of mine who have told me they are not going to get CMSF as it is now, or have stopped playing CMSF as it is now...because of what is NOT in a game that is called Combat Mission. It's almost like CMSF was designed by another team of designers who were told "make a new game that is like CMBB/CMAK and make it better, and oh by the way make it RT too, we need to appeal to a new market." BF can come back from this mistake, and the patching processes so far shows good signs. Why not allow choices for everyone? Why not have everything CMBO/CMBB/CMAK had and the improvements of CMSF??? If this was the case CMSF would have been hailed as, not only good, but great, and sales would have been higher. Battlefront's reputation and the reputation of the earlier CM series are what have carried CMSF forward to date, not the game itself.

Frankly if I wanted RT games I would be playing RT games, like Command and Conquer, Theater of War, Close Combat, (although once upon a time I did put in many hours into Close Combat games...prior to CM1 coming out). Due to the current state of WEGO in CMSF I am thinking about buying Matrix's " PANZER COMMAND: OPERATION WINTER STORM", just to see how they did it. [ October 14, 2007, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: Zemke ]