Dillweed

You think you're joking, but you're not. You obvously havn't heard of the 3rd game in the series: CM: Space Lobsters of Doom I am being 100% serious. [ November 07, 2005, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: Dillweed ]

You're such a cuddly mango, aren't you? If you were a baby seal, I'd use a padded club just to make it slow. </font>

Well, IIRC the AI and the armor penatration arn't big CPU hogs, is the LOS calculations. I think the answer is that processors these days are much more powerful than they were (8? 9?) years ago when CMx1 was being written. Apperently they've wanted to do Real Time for quite a while and are only now confident enought to share it. I'm going to assume they've been thinking hard and testing it out and have finally concluded that it could work. For the record I'm a history student, not a computer science student. I really don't care how everything works programming wise, just that it works. I trust that steve isn't pulling this out of his ass.

And, yet...

Now, I think CMSF sound like a really really cool game. I was amounst the first to defend it in the dark days after the announcement. But my question is this: is it really nessessary to lock down posts by people saying they don't want to play for whatever reason. Now I certainly understand the reasoning for this initially. There were many larger posts where people were voicing their similar opinions. The small "I don't want to have to play as Americans" posts would clog up the board. But now, the large complaint thread have fallen away (with good reason, in my opinion) But I think it is important to mention that those posts are no longer available to view under the default settings. So in effect any posts that arn't posative, a question or a peng challenge are being censored. Now I realize that this is a business and not some pinko feel good people republic of BFC, but I think not locking down posts by people who say they don't want to play would be bennificial. I assume since the forums are no longer raging with complaints that some of the initial naysayers have been won over to at least a "wait and see" position, perhaps they could help convince these new posters. We seem to get them infrequently enough that I have no problem explain the concept behind modules, for example. It seems to me if a post is just instantly locked down at best that person is probably not going to buy the game. At worst we get another falco. I'd like to share my wisdom to help out if I can, and if not mock their stupidity. Guess that sums it up. Any one else have an opinion?

I'm excited. So is co-play going to be in for CMSF, cause I though that was going to have to wait for CMBOx2.

A word on steve would be nice here. Both on the game issues and his personal opinion. He seems pretty knoledgable about this stuff as its kinda his job to know it.

If that were the case I think the Army would have a major sh*tstorm on its hands. While it is a big problem, the numbers are nowhere near 10%. From a Washington Post article Last I checked there were 1,000,000 soldiers in the US Army about 10% of which were female. That would make the rate 0.7%. Which isn't great, but it is comprable to the civillian rate. Coincidentally, this was the very reason my recruiter said he was against women in combat arms. Not to badmouth anyone currently in CA, but he said that in his expirence they were not the sharpest, most pressive tools in the shed. If women were secluded with some on long deployments well...

My $0.02 on Women in combat: Most men would rather die than have their buddies think they are a p*ssy. We migh deny it, but studies indicate otherwise. This is were most of the "will to fight" comes from. Would women do the same? I dunno, and no research has been done to my knoledge. I am inclined to believe they would not, based on my (limited) expirience. Any women on the board to speak to this?

Lets nip this one in the bud before it becomes a political flame. Yes, the **** that went on in AG when it was under Iraqi control was really really bad. But that does not make what whet on there under US control any more acceptable or the people in the pictures any less criminal. But to be fair to the other side this is hardly a damnation of the US effort in Iraq. Anyone who thinks that sort of thing doesn't go on in every prison war zone or not is kidding themselves. The only difference in AG scandal was the preps were unfortunetly stupid enough to photograph themselves comitting the crime. Now, lets all pretend like Abu Griab wasn't even mentioned (I apologise for my involment) and move on. [ November 01, 2005, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: Dillweed ]

Now that's a game, I'd buy Combat Mission: Light Stick Sodomy

But would women be with a very tip of the spear combat arms unit in the period immediatly when they are going on the attack. I kinda think not, but perhaps. IIRC most of the unit modling is still done at the squad (or probably fire team in this case) level so the sex of a soldier would really not matter as the only things for individual soldiers would be very basic (name, specialy, wound state, and I think ammo)

I'm headed out, see if I can find it at the newstand. No such luck. [ November 01, 2005, 02:58 PM: Message edited by: Dillweed ]

Yikes, nobody ever said they were dumb...

Don't get me wrong, NVGs a very important, I expect them to be included (apperently the syrian SF guys have them as well.) I'm not too sure about the more exotic laser acustic based systems. Seems a little excessive. And yes, if anti-mortar radars are being commonly employed at the company level, I definetly expect them to be in. I am not aware that they are, only the bigger anti-artillery radar. I would expect that that would be abstracted. But yes, I share your faith that if something is common for a Stryker company BFC will have it in.

Not to mention jams on the M-16/M-4... Yeah, I remember steve saying that one of the prime advantages of the stryker is its reliability over say the Bradley or the Abrams.

I think these would fall under the "neat, but not worth 3 weeks of coding" catagory. And considering some of the scenarios in the campaign will only contain 1 enamy sniper team, being able to instantly find and waste them on turn would be pretty lame.

I dunno, the demo might be real big. I download the demo for F.E.A.R. 600+ MB and it was about 15 mins of gameplay. So its not unheard of. I myself would prefer to spend a while downloading a pure classic scenario (Chance Engagment, say) rather rather than say something with 1 stryker and a platoon on a 100x100 map.

I don't though I recall hearing that this was a feature I would used to occationally view the movies in CMBO this way from the company commanders view for poops and giggles.

Steve has stated that several features will be availible in "the second release" so I think that would be yes to your question. Or steve is a dirty dirty liar.

Found Steve's comments "Still high up on our wish list. Charles nixed the idea for CMBB and AK because he found the recoding necessary for it to be too much. Now we have a fresh slate. However, Charles is concerned about certain code issues and therefore is not going to promise anything until after he gives it a shot. If it proves to be too much of a headache for us, it will be skipped over until the next release. And there is no point whining ahead of time about it either. Steve" "Full game playback is what we are shooting for. The only options I envision is turning off FoW and seeing the battle from the other player's perspective. Not sure if that is possible to do though. Depends on how Charles stores the data and reads it back. Full turn playback isn't something that is high on our list of things to do, but it might be a side effect possibility of how Charles stitches things together. We'll just have to wait and see. Steve"

IIRC steve had said this was a "major goal" for the next game, but its one of those things that is a lot more complex than it sounds. As far as I know its in the same leauge as PBEM were they hope they will able to include it, but just arn't at that stage in programming yet.

Obviously you don't play CMBB since that game is Evil vs. Evil (except for when playing the Fins, because they were über nice guys ) And of course there are the problems with the Western and Souther Fronts as well... such as firebombing civilian targets, leveling towns/historical structures on a hunch the bad guys were in there, the occasional large scale slaughter of POWs, looting on a massive scale, rearming the Mafia, giving away 1/2 of Europe to be plundered by the Soviets, etc. And let's not forget FDR deliberately trying to get into a shooting war with Germany even though Congress clearly didn't want one. Then of course there is all that wonderful stuff that happened in the PTO, which I don't think I need bother to detail. Yup, the morality of WWII is as clear as mud One thing I've learned over the years, when it comes to geopolitics NOTHING is clear cut and NOTHING is as it seems. Sometimes theory and reality are more closely related than other times, but nothing is clear cut good or bad. Steve </font>

Who can say with Syria, but I kinda doubt we'll be seeing a lot of AT guns. ATGM are more likely. Of course there won't be too many of those in CMBOx2

I must admit, I'd like this as well. Last I had heard they really wanted to include it with an option to turn off fog of but arn't sure if they will be able to with the way its programmed. So a hopeful maybe.