slysniper

I have waited a long time for this game, I wanted something like this since they started making the CMX1 version of the game. Now that it is about to be released, I sit here in the shadows and watch this AAR and the only thing that keeps crossing my mind is how much I will need to learn to adapt my tactics to the modern battlefield. It Is a bloody Slaughter House and I really don't see it as something that will be easy to get accustomed too. CMSF always seemed so one-sided when Running Nato forces. It will be interesting to see if Bill will be able to cause a little more Blood shed vs the American units with what he has to use. Get these turns posted guys, the anticipation is killing me.

The quick answer is yes, been tested and there is spotting factors that makes it harder for the moving tank to spot. But I know when I did my test, which was long ago, the factors did not provide enough of a penatly. But since then BF have adjusted those factors and it has improved as to moving tanks not spotting as well. But I have not run any test to see what the present penalties are as to time variences compared to a non-moving tank. But there are others that test stuff all the time, maybe someone else can tell you what you might presently expect to see.

For ONCE, I am very glad I have waited. I would like to provide more income to BF but I still have not bought 3.0 or the pack because all I keep seeing is threads like this. I sure hope they get this new system completed and that it is more user friendly than what it presently seems to be because it is somewhat of a joke as to its present state. Not that I could not deal with it, I just not motivated enough to do it and presently all my h2h matches are in CMRT.

Well, I could solve that problem for you. I also just lost a opponent that I have played for years against. So I am looking to pick up a new person. I have private messaged you my email if you are interested.

I have been playing CMRT from the day it came out and Yes I have seen the bug in a few scenarios and yes I wish it had been fixed before now. But I feel no compasion for the Whiners here. It has not impacted my play really at all and I have played dozens of Battles without it causing me any heartache. So chill, the time is now close at hand and you will get the patch. Too bad you had to act as you have done. For it has done nothing as to acheiving anything. (Like I have dozens of computer games with Bugs that will never be fixed. So at least these guys care and do something about it - many other company's dont)

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, I HAD THAT TYPE OF LUCK OFTEN BACK IN THE CMx1 DAYS :)

Hey, Great Test I think it shows the strength of the system.

As Erwin said. Except it is more like 99.9 % that would have no clue as to if the scenes were reasonable possible or not in the movie. So for all of them, the movie seems realistic enough to think possible.

Oh man, The Movie must have a Bug in it. Get BF to fix it or something. I will not be able to watch it until patch 4.0 comes out and the Tiger does a proper number on that Sherman. This thread has the same stupid complaints that many of the threads here in the forum have. You people really need to get a concept on what life is about. One - Movies are not made to represent real life, if you think they do - major issue Two - games that similate real life really dont - they function on the mechanics of a game - so there will always be aspects that do not work correct to real life. That is all you get today for learning - class Just be grateful they even tried to make a movie based on a WWII Tank. as the backdrop to the storyline.

I get tired of folks saying things are wrong with the game where as it is them and their lack of ability to learn to play the game well and just cannot come to grips with that and thinks it must be the programming that is lacking since they cannot manage to control their units worth a crap. Yes, there is always room for improvement in the game. But boy there is much more room for somehow teaching players to actually learn how to use the features they already have.

With this type of attitude, you should never play CM ever again. Any of them. Because I cannot remember where any patch or release has not fixed some of the problems but somehow introduce some new issues or bring back some old forgotten ones. But Bucko, you keep holding on there. For the perfect day when all things of this world come together and the game becomes perfect. Because how dare we have a bug wreck the experence of your play.

When the game first was released I complained about it and was put in my place with Steve being part of those that commented. Since then, I have learned to play with them better and don't think it is a terrible problem as it is presently done within the game. The Italian's were prone as to having to work in large groups in RL But I had thought about it all this time and what I thought might be the perfect solution is not allowing additional splitting of the unit. But programming that would get the unit to spread out into adjacent action spots more often. But I bet that would be like trying to program a whole new game since they are the only units who would need it and all programming has never been designed for such a feature. But it would sure help resolve the problem of so many soldiers bunching up into one action spot so much at times.

Good starting post. After that there should not have been any justifying on how the game presently acts. A question like this should be whether the player should have control over the action or should the AI. Who cares if the AI is doing something that might be logical, that only matters as long as the AI is the source that should be controling the action. The answer is simple, button or unbutton should be in control of the player. The player is the one who should decide if a stug will try to man a external MG (just like any other unit within the game) As has been pointed out. Either this is a oversight from BF or more likely a programming challenge they have not addressed because of the fact it is not the commander but another unit doing the action. Either way, it is good to point it out and to express the fact that this is a item that should be addressed and somehow placed within the players control instead of the present functioning of it.

well, there was a discovered problem in that the smoke AA guns put off was prevently units from being able to keep a spot on them to fire. And with them firing as much as they do, could make it almost impossible for units to return fire. I do not know if that issue has been fixed yet or not. I do know if I know the location of one. I generally use my area fire command for my units to help make sure that my units continue to fire on the area without having to worry about keeping a spot on the unit. But as for the AA unit having the ability to withstand fire adnormally. No, they seem to die just fine as long as you get rounds on them. I see them die as easy as any other crew weapon.

I prefer the quick move myself. I find that if the enemy is supressed, getting as many men into the room as fast as possible is the best. There is still the spotting issue, the longer it takes, the more of a chance his unit might spot one of mine first and open up. So I want as many eyes as possible to try and find and fire before any of his units might recover. If I feel I have not supressed the enemy well is when using hunt might be the better option, but in this mode it is a real toss up as to who will spot and fire first, so the only benefit I see in this mode is that I might only lose part of the unit because only a few men have entered the building generally before combat begins.

I agree, I will not say I have proven it, but I find the game will on many items not show contact when you are in the overall mode. But if you go through each unit, you can always find a unit with the visual as to what has been seen or action taken. Where I notice it the most is at times I notice my troops firing on a enemy unit that I cannot see when in overall visual mode. But click through the units and the one firing has visual and you can see the enemy unit. So, I bet some unit can see the flashes. I just dont think the spotting indicators and the fog of war built into the game is a perfect science and as pointed out there is bigger fog of war issues than spotting muzzle flashes and not having the spotting unit clearly indicating it.

I agree 100% I use slow in the exact way. If I want to move into a building and gareentee myselve concealment, it works just fine. As for moving in and having enemy troops in there. Well I should know for sure if that is the case before I give a crawl command. And if there is troops in there, sending my troops in with hunt command should not mean they are not or should not be spotted from other locations. If you are clearing a building with enemy troops in it, getting spotted through a window is not your top priority to make sure it does not happen. So maybe the OP does not like how the game approaches it, but I dont see the game as broken. I think the game gives the options needed for what is wanted.

Well, don't get too excited about playing the AI as to how well it does. Especially QB's It is very random as to if it can put together a good fight or not. What little I have messed with it I find it a waste of time as much as it is a chance of being able to create a good battle. I think in RT your chances are better in that I think they have learned to create QB maps with plans that help the AI act a little more appropriate. But it still can do some poor things also. Of course it has a lot to do with what you select also as to how it might play. Anyway, just saying. I can promise you, every battle will not turn out challenging like the one you just had. But It can do it at times. If you are willing to play it enough to have them few experiences happen.

Well, I see you have learned of a good way to get the enemy to waste their grenades

Oh, its modelled, I guess the question is, does it match reality well. The smg's are limited as to penetration. Just proved that to myself recently by letting halftracks pull up to them and take them on. No penetrations. Where as, In a little battle I created I have a 50 cal MG that just loves to tear through buildings and anyone that might be inside them. So that is the two extremes. but the rest do seem to fall in between and react to terrain as to what can and cannot penetrate certain objects. There was tweeks along the way also from BF, because we all recall how building were hardly any cover at all when CMBN first game out, Now rifles still penetrate some buildings. but not to the extent they once did. In other words, sheds still are not real cover

Oh my, it is sooo Real. I need to Buy it. Noooooot:p

I messed with it some more, and tweaked it a little. Maybe I will publish it. Since I have not done that since the CMX1 days. Yes it is really designed to be played against the AI. But I did test it in hot seat, but it is a solitaire design and really is made to see how well you can do. I found if you do not play it right, it can become a bloody mission. But if executed well. I lose two men generally. If I do kick it out. I will not have a set up for the Commando's since that is where the mission is won or lost. You will have to find one yourself as to having a good mission plan.

I do not trust the hidden units to spot, But If I want the enemy to get very close to my ambush location. the only way that is going to happen is to have my units hidden. So my trick is. If I need my men concealed. I hide them only if I have other units that have good overwatch locations that I can leave unhidden and can open fire and spot the enemy before they walk over the top of my hidden group. So my ambushes play out like this many times. Enemy enters an open area moving towards my troops in heavy brush 50 meters away (not spotted because they are hidden.) I have a mg on the flank 150 meters away with a cover arc that allows it to open up on the enemy when they are about 35 meters away from my troops and now they are not able to retreat immedietely to cover. So the mg opens up on the enemy, which normally will stop them in their tracks, they start returning fire. But whether they are winning or losing that fight does not matter. On the next turn. I unhide all my hidden troops and they start in on the fire fight. Normally leading to good success. That is how I like to set up my ambushes. With long range assets starting the fire fight, then close rangre assets opening up after unhiding or by actually moving them up from a totally hidden spot (like being behind a house, then moving them into the house once my long range unit has the enemy in a fire fight).

Actually did he not point out how to get a pirated version. More likely has never bought the game, but has been playing pirated version. Now what would you think about that.

As I recall a little of that has happened your way. I must admit that the main charectors that visit this site have beliefs in certain ways of acting and communicating when bringing concepts or complaints to the table. Its called, showing a little respect and communicating in a polite manner. When it is not shown by a person in their comments. Yes, there are plenty here ready to bounce on them and give them some of their own rude comments right back to them. In general, you get back what you give out on this Forum. So if you do not like how many forum members communicate with you, it is because of how you communicate with them. It is actually one of the things I like about this forum, there is some expectation to act somewhat mature, those that dont, well they and their concepts are normally bashed because of the source it is coming from. Sounds elitist to me.