slysniper

Thanks, I will move onto that. I prefer h2h, but I always like a few AI games when I get into a new one just to get a feel for how its playing. I am already noticing that the small arms for the Germans are sure giving them a new feel. I have to smile though, I think I have kill most of them during clip changes. Yes they have the fire power, but they also run out of ammo when I assault and when you are out numbered, that hurts.

Nice win. But I would be hard pressed to think I could lose to anyone if I had the German side. But I will say, the map scoring makes it somewhat balanced in that you don't need to clear the map, just gain a majority of it. Again a impressive battle design As for bogging, I lost two tanks to that. I tried to use good terrain as much as possible, but that leads into bad positions verse the Germans. What is sad, the new game has bugs in it I have not seen before, the game should be improving, not getting worse. Anyway, one bug cost me another tank. it just would not move no matter what the order was. everything showed fine. but it was not. (I just looked at it as if another tank bogged.) Because the chances sure were there.

This was my first battle within the new game and I looked for a Scenario that appeared it might be good for playing against the AI. I found it, This was a good challenge vs the AI, which is not normal for me. The set up and map were great. I give the designer a 10 out of 10 on this one. You need to play as the American's , as is recommended. I had a minor victory, but in truth. I had my ass kicked. There was even a couple of moments where the game managed to make a move against me that a person would use. The enemy armor had its moments of really messing me up. In the end my attack was finished, I had no operational armor left and the germans did. Great challenge. I would not recommend this game for H2H play. (Unless you like a German win)

So, is it one that they are working on to fix. Lets face it, BF has plenty of issues in their game, that question is , which ones they feel they can fix and make the efforts to work on. Of course, I would think this is one that should be easy to debug. well, compared to some that seem to get the best of them.

well, if it was possible. I sure would vote for them to not take as much damage or be able to stop rounds

Its taken so long I have actually lost interest in it. I will buy it, but I could care less when it comes out because at this point I will not be playing it til I get some opponents that I need it to play against.

Actually, yes the abrams pretty roomy for a tank and bigger guys can fit. But there is really advantages for a smaller guy when it has to do with being a tanker. I have noticed the Russians do it also. When showing tank crews , its not a big Ivan. Its a Ivan that looks like a gymnast. Just saying

It also forgets to mention if you happen to be shorter than 5'-8" First time I saw a Marine Corp tank unit I was shocked. They had basically found the smallest marines I had ever seen and placed them all together in that unit. It made me realize I would never be a Tanker. 6'-6" is not what you call as being the best size to work with when dealing with armor.

Oh I see we have some passionate players that are getting a little out of hand because BF does not hand them all their wishes and hopes of what the game should be. As others have mentioned. The fact it is a computer game should be enough to understand you just cannot have all your dreams fulfilled with the likes of a few guys doing the best they can to write code to make a game that portrays combat realistically. limitations is the norm in that world and they have done a excellent job of making it what it presently is. Lets look at a much easier game to code but that is out there and see how perfect it is. Madden football. Been tweeking the same code concept for twenty years now and with staff in the hundred's for sure. Can I still find faults, you bet. Why, its a computer game. It will never be like the real thing. Had not touched it in years, played a season vs the AI and the playoffs (won the stupid thing) lost only one game in the season. Why. Because its a game with only so much code that can only address so many actions. I as a human, find aspects of the game that are not be addressed by the code and I use it to my advantage. Hey, all of us here want change, want better features and such. The fact that some of us are a little more realistic and accepting of the fact it is just a game and we don't put unrealistic expectations on this company to provide us more than they can do is a good thing. because if we all acted like some here. I am sure that BF would have walked away from this endeavor long ago.

OK, I SEE WE HAVE PLENTY HERE LETTING OUT THEIR CHILDISH SIDE. No, its not fun to have to wait for something that has been known about for some time now. But the situation is what it is. I am sure BF did not plan on it being held up this long either. But attitudes like this will just encourage them to not give any bones on forth coming products until they are sure it will be short term before release. We will see how you like that.

I had asked the same question months back and there is a thread with some replies on it. The trick is can you find the thread, I am busy at work at the moment, so of no real help.

Well now I see the problem. You are playing someone that cannot handle the fog of war concept. He needs to go back to his CMX1 and leave those of us alone that understand the concepts of CMX2 spotting. I recall how hard it was to adjust to the fact that my units were not going to get that spot on the enemy like they were guaranteed too in the older games I played. But being ex military, it did make for a game that played more realistically. so I fought through the challenges of adjusting my game play. The funny thing was, all I did was play more realistic tactics than what I was doing before because I had learned game skills that really were not very true to how it plays out in R.L. Of course CMX2 still has plenty of unrealistic actions, but it does a better job than the old stuff.

Playing both sides does let you get a great understanding and perspective as to what each side is facing. I find if I have a area that is a problem to protect in the one game, then of course I will attack that exact spot from the other side. So its perfect intel that is for sure. Also, if my opponent makes a good move, then I might do the same in my other battle also. So yes , you can play much different than you would in a normal set up. No, its sure is not blind play by far and no it does not give you a natural feel. I guess I have no problem with it because I have done it a few times and know what to expect. it is what it is. I would prefer another format but that is not my decision On the plus side, it does work as a good training technic in that it helps you to think about it from the other sides perspective which you should do in every battle. This method just makes it automatic, but it should show you it is worth looking at it from the enemies point of view before you make your plans in any battle

Finding good opponents can seem challenging at times. Even with the group here that in general are a little more mature, you will find that there is many players that have not learned to handle defeat when playing a game and are childish. Just move on as suggested, when you find someone that is good and a polite player. Try to build a friendship and play them as much as they are willing. For they are as gold and should be treated as such. Even then, you find with time you have a tendency to part ways and move on because of many different reasons. So you are always on the search for someone new to give you good competition.

As for tournament play. Another way to handle this so you do not need to play both sides is. they could have just taken the top four players from each side. 4 American players, four german players. Personnally I like playing both sides and find no issue with it. I also find no issue with the forces not being equal, So yes the Germans have a disadvantage. thus they should at least start out playing defensively. So far I feel good about both battles. Pushing as the American and as the German, I just dealt my first major blow to him. He just lost a good amount of his front line infantry on the main push he is making.

Just get China in the fight, forget about added features. Now that they have Russia in finally, with what I figure will be more NATO forces in add ons in the future. Now I want my dirty little hands on China forces. (come on Steve - dream up a make believe war there also)

I just played and finished this Scenario playing as recommended as the German vs the AI Russian. Just want to let the Designer know what a fantastic job he did on this Scenario. First it is clear that it was designed for the play as the German vs the Ai Second, it is a excellent challenge in that mode Third, the map is a 10 of 10 Forth, the unit selection was interesting and it had a great period fight and feel to it. I really enjoyed playing with the hetzers and the feel of being so overwhelmed by the Russians, it was great fun having to stop that force. The battle was interesting almost throughout and was a fight to the end. ( I was having to check ammo on most of my units and supplies were a key as to doing well in halting the different assaults during play. (By the end, There were units that were down to the last few rounds and no supplies to be had - Loved it) The Hetzers were key units, but MG placements , Snipers and Schrecks placements were also major factors. So a great battle to making sure you are using all your assets well. I had many heroes, but to my own surprise was two of my Snipers, I did not note how well they were do, since city fighting normally means they do not live long. But I had two left alive at the end , one with 28 kills, the other with 23. So they were a big factor for me and I had not really even noticed it. Since they had to withdrawal multiple times. Yes I know it takes me forever to get around to playing some of these, but this one is highly recommended to anyone who has not tried it yet.

That is about the most logical post I have seen in a long time. You are very correct in many aspects of how things are going. At the present speed they are going, BF will be lucky to push the present series of games to their end as to modules. They are not moving fast enough to keep generating games in the present game engine, you can already see many who are growing tired of it and that no major improvements can be done to it. So with each new release, they will lose some of the old customer base because of lack of major improvement. So it will come down to having to get creative with a new engine and new concepts to get a new consumer base back to wanting to purchase the product. But Selecting a early war period would also be a good move to extending the life of the older stuff also by not repeating it, so the older games stay more of a option to purchase for said time frame even if outdated.

Well, if you have a problem with the poor shooting in the game. Then take into account, that in the game the guys getting shot at are not reacting like they would in real life either. Yes in the game you see a squad continue to run in a line as they are receiving fire. RL. them jokers are hitting the deck , scattering for anything that looks like cover or something along those lines. So making the shooter more accurate might make sense, but only when the targets get a little more realistic also. For now, in most situations, the game has the balance about right. Most of the time, a ambush will do a number on the enemy. But the game always give you surprises, so learn to live with them moments instead of the complaints all the time. We been playing the game for how many years now, must not all that bad as to how it works

Stick to your Guns, Steve. Having been a part of them fractured systems, you are correct in what happens once there is different groups. It is nice to have a game system where there is no question on how it plays and by what settings.

MAN, I LOVED THAT GUY Can someone find him, I am sure they could use him in the Trump campaign.

Well, it proves one thing. BF likes to say, oh it cannot be a bad problem in the programming if it only shows up now. Its not a issue, if no one has noticed it until now . (well this is proof, things can be wrong and it takes a long time to notice them when there is so much to the game, that every detail is not reviewed on a constant basis) Has BF even been informed that this has been noticed. No indication in this thread as to wanting to confirm that they are aware of it now.

Oh, I know. Not really disagreeing with the concept. Just pointing out, Getting hit by any shot by a round that is capable of punching through steel plate is going to mess you up no matter what. So I will keep the plate, save me from some light rounds if they come my way and also helps me to know if something targeting me if I hear the bings or holes start appearing. Just saying.

Dead is dead, if its going through the shield. Then I doubt, removing the shield and letting it pass through me is going to make it that much better. Lets guess, instead of a 10 % chance of living, its 20% chance. And since it blows right through, there is a better chance to save a limb if the shot was grazing. I have a better suggestion, don't get shot

Very well put JasonC. I would assume we all know that the game does not come even close to all these aspects of how visual works. I would be really amazed if someone did some day figure out some programming that could mimic what happens in real life when it comes to spotting things and how things can be hidden because of camouflage. The game does a few things to catch a little bit of it, but it could always do more. The game does factor in spotting units once they fire, and does it pretty good. It factors in moving units being spotted easier, I feel it does this semi good, but lacks at times. But we know it does nothing for outlining, shadows and these type of items. It would be interesting to see if they could program something that would take into account the terrain the unit was in and just make it harder to spot by that basic fact that it was in that terrain. Just because a line of sight can be drawn to it, the terrain should still be factoring in something as to it being seen or not seen. At this point, this is where the game really lacks. (simple proof, a tank in open ground should have a modifier that makes it almost impossible to miss within the first viewing test of a turn.) But what do we have, tanks that can be invisible for way to long in open ground and that is at distances that make it a joke. So we have grumbled about this since this game engine has come out, but again, I do not see this changing until they try a new engine and take a little bit of a different approach and try to program something that factors these things in.