slysniper

I sold mine. My squad leader, ASL and my magazines. I made more money than what I bought them for. Loved the game but when the time to move on came, I went. Even if it does require me to keep a nice computer up and running to enjoy what we have now.

Good stuff, I have been waiting for this for about 12 years from BF, shock force never did it for me. I can tell that this game could get me into real trouble when it releases.

That is the concept. Of course, they really have a viewing indicator that shows you which way you are looking, not a compass per say. So the only challenge there would be is to design it so that if per chance you are looking the same direction that the wind is blowing, both indicators would need to show and not overlap each other.

Funny, but true. What ever settings was used in the last game you are in is what comes up in the next one opened. It would solve much of this problem by each game remembering its own settings. I doubt we could get a on screen indicator, but it would be nice if there was a screen that showed all the settings at once and a indication as to what each was set to that could be pulled up with a key stroke command.

Very true, It sure makes it easy to Love them all, because at some point you get the latest improvements to all the games.

You would think this drives others as crazy as it does me. But I play so many battles at once, I cannot remember which way the wind is blowing. Which is very important when laying smoke. So it just crossed my mind. How about adding that in so there is a indicator for it on screen. It is something that should be available all the time. Maybe a added indicator in the compass for the wind direction. Anyway, all the hunting games have something, that is so you can keep track that you are down wind of your prey. Anyone else think this is worth adding or am I the only one that thinks it is frustrating to go look it up. since there no indicator on screen.

I have stories, but mostly on the receiving end. So not a joy to share. But the one that still sticks out the most is losing one of only two panthers I had in a game against a hoard of Americans I had them pretty much stalled in their attack and had this tank gunning down anything that moved in the center of the map. Then out of a hedge in front of me about 220 meters away a bazooka round sails, there was so much arch to it, when it missed my turret after passing through a tree, it penetrated the back deck of the engine area and then a massive explosion, all killed. It is posted her somewhere, It was back when cmbn was first out. I am not sure if they would take that shot now, not sure what the max. is set for

I agree, likely the first thing will be a RT patch, then they have to work on it for the older games. So you still have a while to wait. But who truly knows

I just played this today and just had to comment on how much I enjoyed it. I played it as the Russians against the AI, on elite, doing we go turns. I found it very challenging and I really had to adjust my units plenty and play my men with every hill and slope in mind as to their movement. There was plenty of times where my attack was being weighed in sliding into positions just a few feet from my last locations as to being a successful turn. You are attacking a prepared defense and it does a good job of putting up a fight. Now I do not feel I played this battle unusually well. But I did manage to take objective 1 and 2 and had managed to belly crawl a few men to objective 3 to cancel points. But with 4 minutes left, the AI gave up. So I finished with a winning score of 2100 to 0 ( which in all truth should never had been) I just hate how most scenarios are scored. This battle should have been at most a minor win for me. I lost two tanks to the AT gun and was just finished clearing the infantry on objectives 1 and 2. I did use my arty pretty well and my best units in the battle were my Sniper's They were what won it for me, in that they cleared more MG's nest than likely my Arty, Tanks and Infantry combined. It is seldom I get the snipers to make an impact in the game but this battle they sure did. I had one guy with 8 kills. Which think of that as mg's nest and you can understand why they were my Hero's in this battle.

He was a little full of himself that day. As a sniper, which all my shooting basically was with the Remington 700 with a free floating heavy bore barrel and shooting a .308 round. He gave you incorrect info. Now keep in mind, as snipers, we trained with that weapon out to 1000 yards (so you could say the effective range is 1000 yards - but it is not.) For me and for most others I trained with. I would say 700 yards was the distance I felt convertible taking a shot at and knowing in all likelihood I would hit my target. At 800, you started seeing the variables play a lot with the bullet and you needed to really take them into account. by the time you get to 1000 yards. it is a nightmare to try and get a first shot on target unless you are lucky or very good at reading winds ( at every 200 yards), humidity. height variences, speed of target and so on. Now with a normal rifle firing a round that is pretty hot, I would say in the hands of a good shooter, that distance is 500 yards. generally that it is convertible to make a accurate shot.

I have to disagree here with this statement. Bill as always is showing us a good use of terrain and tactics. But I feel that if the rolls were reversed, that the Soviet Smg'g can hold the line. As I think I mentioned before, I just did it in a battle where I had a squad of smg's in the woods kill close to a platoon of men in a H2H battle and I only had part of the unit (a fire team) fall back because they lost a couple of men.

CORRECT, THERE REALLY IS NO PROBLEMS. THE GAME IS WORKING FINE. The main thing is people trying to learn how to figth with or against smg's in the game. When things dont go their way, the question starts coming up if its the games fault or flaw within the game. This time it is basically some comments are reflecting that, some times we as humans cannot accept the fact that we could be doing something wrong:eek:

It is one of the sad things about the game, as it progresses. In general it becomes more and more challenging for new people playing it to overcome the learning curve. And you comments are appropriate. The interesting thing is, anyone can make this game into almost anything they want if they understand it enough to work with the tools given. But I see how that task has become much more challenging also and how it would be a very hard learning curve for a new person to make their own scenarios. And the focus of players who have been with it for many years and are skilled, they want to create and play scenarios which are challenging and interesting to them. So the two camps do not help each other well in their focus. In general, for some reason small battles have been lost in the scenario design of many good designers. But for those with less skill, creating small scenarios is where all newer designers should start. Learning to design good small battles teach skills that are needed. designing big battles can hide many flaws, and to tell you the truth, many of the large scenarios are not that well designed anymore. Scoring for many battles are not well thought out anymore and really many lack balence compared to what we were seeing many years ago. I am glad to hear someone is putting out byte battles, at least that is something for you to look forward to.

In other words, you never know for sure how well the bldg gives cover until you see the bullets bounce off it or you have a great memory what every bldg looks like. Some mod and single bldgs can look very similar. Churches are about the best and in general, the bigger the structure, the better the cover tends to be. Small buildings provide little cover and as mentioned barns, very little. On them type of structures, it is best to stay behind them instead of inside them to get some benefits in protection

REALLY, DO YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE. They are all great, I cannot figure how anyone cannot just want to have them all. Every period has distinct events and match ups and terrain that makes them interesting. But If I had to select between them two MG was my favorite.

I agree with this completely along with the statement about how this battle so far is being impacted by the fact that the side on defence and not moving has a huge advantage when it comes to forest fighting. What the Russians lack is smoke, I have found smoke is the only thing that can give the attacking side a chance to close with the enemy and make it a fair fight when in woods. Well in this case, if the Russians are able to stand toe to toe, a fair fight is weighed majorly in their favor with the short range firepower they will produce. Bill is just pointing out, that fire power does not trump terrain when it comes to this match up. Reverse the rolls and The germans will not clear any of the woods, Gareented, I just had a H2H battle that my opponent tried just that. I think he lost about a platoon of men in his first effort and that was coming into contact with maybe15 smg's waiting in a defensive position for him in the woods They never had a chance, losses were like 10-1. Without smoke, I see no way for the attacker to win this battle. The Terrain is the most important thing here.

This week-end I did some testing with these just to see how messed up the unit is. I can say, stay away from these units until a patch fixes them. I know BF understands there is some issue. But it seems to be more than one issue maybe. Just for commenting. I had the halftrack running away from enemy trucks, it would not stop and fight, but would retreat. That must be one mean truck driver to scare an armed track with flame and machine gun. The other interesting thing was area fire with the HT was very hard to adcheive. First the crew must be unbuttoned, second the range had to be very short and third, even then sometimes it would fire , sometimes not. And you might as well forget about engaging any enemy unit. Even if you do meet the conditions. The HT will retreat at the presence of anything

JasonC - Ban - never, stop talking like that. I enjoy his input too much and have learned to accept him for the person he is. Plus he is very smart and has great resources and never mis-spells anything. (which I will never adchieve any of these feats) So he is having one of his attitudes about how he knows all and how we should all see the light as to how the game should be and submit ourselves to that great wisdom. Face it, anytime you deal with someone that has a huge amount of knowledge about any subject. That person will judge themselves as being above those around them and become authorative in their actions. When those they deem as being inferior to themselves do not agree with their knowledge. They tend to get defensive and start to want to prove their superiority. So that is how I see most of this tread, it is nothing but a ego bash as to who thinks their in the right. (Too bad it is in a area where there is no right or wrong, just a matter of preference). So pretty much most everyone is making fools of themselves. - but keep it up. It is fun watch people act foolishly

WELL, NEVER BUY CMFI, I had no real problem with it and started to learn to make sure the unit was going to multi square locations or split them to force them to spread out. But in cmfi, the Italians have huge squads and they cannot split. So I complained, and boy did they put me in my place. Anyway in there you might find you are entering a one hex building and you have 12 guys that must go in together. Needless to say, you have to find ways to be creative to not let that type of bunching up happen when playing some of the italian units

We all have been there, it is just one of the stubid things to learn about how it works in the game. But to this day, I dont like it. Why oh why did they just not program it to work like all the other stuff in the game. one minute, smoke is available, but the next it isnt. Just because you could not get the HE fire to stop in time, which is hard when playing in minute increments. BF, its just stupid , and no explanation will justify that decision on how it works. It just does not match the rest of the ammo functions in the game. So there is my rant for the day. Once you understand it, you learn how to save and get the chance to use the smoke if needed

Well, most of the negative attitude either left the game or converted over to the new style of engine. So now we are back to just people wanting improvements here and there. The game system is very good and it allows you to enjoy many aspects of combat. So if you thought it was great back then, you will wet your pants now. So enjoy

I am also wondering what game they are playing. I have only played a few battles so far, But if I had to say which side has the advantage. The battles I have played have all favored the Russians. I also wonder why so much hatred for the Panthers, they sure have been no uber tank against me or for me. I have seen 5 or 6 now go up in flames to T34/85s at about 1000 meters. So when some think it is so one sided. Yes maybe on a test map, but in the game, where the side that gets the jump and sighting first and able to put rounds on target, it seems that takes away the other advantages. Get them T 34's to 600 meters or less and then the fun really starts. Hail the Russian Army. Now I agree with the fact it would be nice to have some well designed scenarios where you have stugs and Pz iv's instead of Panthers all the time, because as pointed out, really this was what most battles might have had and they would reflect the challenges better as to what many soldiers really faced in the time frame. But it appears some just want to complain for the sake of it, like it really matters.

No, not really, I prefer to do that with the defender having decent odds and I manage to force it into a one sided slaughter, now that at least feels like something has been accomplished. The type of battle you want would have no interest to me unless you have very restrictive goals that both sides know about to provide any challenge at all. Like the defender gets an automatic win if he gets 5% losses on the attacker.

As for the proper feel for the time setting and the battles. Can someone comment on how the campaign games do. I have not had time to play them yet but was hopeful that they gave you the player a more of a Historical correct feel for what was happening for this time frame. I found CMFI very good in the campaigns as to giving the feel of a dominating attack where one is seeing a force steam roll over the enemy but that there still concerns for not taking losses, using ammo wisely and other factors that made for a interesting as to see if the attack would make it to its finial objectives or loose momentum because of minor losses that add up to force the advantage into more of a stalemate situation.

I just want to know what everone has been drinking lately. man some attitude has really shown up this week. As far as scenario design is concerned. a mixture of all types are great. It is too bad they even picked which ones went into the game, Put them all in, But no matter who designed it or the logic involved. Some will like it, others will not. you can never please everyone. So it is good that at least you have a game that allows you to make what you like, or there appears that plenty commenting here would not own the game at all if they could not do their own thing. As for expecting BF to meet your preferance, get real, they will meet what they feel is the norm and will please that group in general because that is the smart bussiness, and they have provided the ability for those that are not that group to still enjoy the game also. That is even smarter Bussiness. Please show me how many other game companies do that, not many. So be grateful. It is sad when I read the jasonC will not share his skills and produce a scenario for all to enjoy. I know he would do a excellent job. But I understand, for it is easy to create something for yourselve and it takes much less work and no one will be critical of your work. I find myself doing that, but my reasons is for time sake, I just dont have the time to create something I think worthy to share with others anymore. But when I did, I did it for the sake of giving something of myself to others. I did not care if someone did not like my work, because I know others would. I had scenarios where some would give me perfect 10's and others might give me 6's or 7's. I did not mind their comments, even when rude. there is things you can learn from them, I had the choice as to if there is value in their views, without having to take it personnally. So like that, those scenarios here being discussed can provoke thoughts for future designs. But dont worry about the negative comments too much. You created what you wanted to, and for some, they find them un-appealing. if you want to design something to their likes go for it, but I find, its best to do what you like and dont try to please others too much unless you can see the logic and put it into your own wants of what you want to create.