TheNathan
-
Posts
94 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by TheNathan
-
-
None, or they would have called it WWIII and we'd probably all be glowing in the darkOriginally posted by Battlefront.com:Rankorian,
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Modern Warfare is like colonial warfare. When the US spends more on its military than....how many of the next countries combined? The last developed nation that fought a total war against an equally advanced nation was.....oh, give me something past WW2.
But I don't understand what this has to do with tactical wargaming. When I'm in command of a Stryker Platoon in CM:SF I don't give a flying fig how much money was spent equipping my guys because a $5 RPG can rip through my rides pretty effectively if I don't pay attention to good tactics.Steve </font>
-
The ability to have the "air guard" dudes inside the Stryker button up would be rather nice.
-
Currently, you can't even have them button up if anticipating IEDs, arty/mortars, or simply hot runs through urban terrain where speed and force preservation are very important.
-
Yeah but if you are under heavy fire, you would think they would have the good sense to button up and save themselves, as they usually just die anyway.Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:That would defeat the whole purpose, wouldn't it. They are suppose to provide over watch, or "air guard"
-
Sadly, I think there is no way you can get them to save themselves and close the damned hatches. This is really too bad as, guaranteed, you will have those two guys get shot up if they encounter any kind of serious firepower.
This is especially annoying when it comes to IEDs, as some of the seemingly unavoidable IEDs on the Al Shamas (or whatever it is) level on the main campaign really devastate the two guys with their heads up, even from a considerable distance away.
-
The unofficial "Immortal Badass" mod fixed pretty much all the bugs and added weapons. Brigade E5 is a brilliant game, btw.Originally posted by TOG:There is a game like that. At least near that. It's Birigade E5. It's like Jagged Alliance in real time, but you can issue orders on pause, and it's full 3d. Graphics aren't really the best but it's sure lots of fun. Unfortunately it has some bugs. The game gives you a lot more control over your soldiers than Jagged Alliance.
http://www.1cpublishing.eu/game/brigade-e5-new-jagged-union/overview
It seems that soon we'll see a sequel called '7.62'
There is also a very fun multiplayer, in RT but every player has some time limit for pausing. You can pause to keep up with action, your total pause time is limited for example to 5 minutes (you can adjust time limit)
-
I couldn't agree with you more Nathan but as Eric Young said a few years ago "If it's not Real-time nobody (Paradox?) would even talk to you about it". BFC had to make a choice like everyone else, sell games or else. Can't fault them for that. Hopefully some of us "will get it" a bit farther down the road. Steve is listening and Charles has even posted, hell we even pissed Rune off a bit and thats not that easy to do. </font>Originally posted by Abbott:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by TheNathan:
So, if the refinement in LOS/LOF is much more taxing on hardware, shouldn't the game be true we-go so the machine can effectively process what is going on in 60 second intervals like in CMx1? From what I read back in the day, the reason why CMx1 was we-go was that it would be impossible to run the game on computers of the time if the game was real-time. So, given advances in computer technology, shouldn't we go for as much of a refined and realistic system as current systems allow by utilizing we-go?
-
So, if the refinement in LOS/LOF is much more taxing on hardware, shouldn't the game be true we-go so the machine can effectively process what is going on in 60 second intervals like in CMx1? From what I read back in the day, the reason why CMx1 was we-go was that it would be impossible to run the game on computers of the time if the game was real-time. So, given advances in computer technology, shouldn't we go for as much of a refined and realistic system as current systems allow by utilizing we-go?
-
Well, that's some good news. Maybe some kind of official announcement should be made or something?Originally posted by rune:Philip,
Again, false logic. Who said patches do NOT continue after 1.05? No one here said that, what was said is not 100% of Charles' time goes towards patches, some time has to go to generate the new module. Bug fixes or game enhancements will be patched back into CMSF, but things like units, TO&e, will not for obvious reasons.
Again no one at battlefront said 1.04 or 1.05 is the final patch, quit saying that.
Rune
-
You mean the "Universal Peace" that Toynbee described? Hm, that would be an interesting viewpoint, and you may be right.Originally posted by FinnN:Actually the world has never been more alike than ever before, and getting more so - especially in cities. Clothes are pretty much the same, music is pretty much the same, food is getting more similar and the list goes on. Despite the usual diatribes here, politically things are also getting closer too. The urban world is heading for homogeneity and the rest will follow on in time.
Have fun
Finn
Unfortunately the "Universal Peace" isn't really a peace, and is considered a dangerous development, though a necessary one.
-
LOL This is so funny.Originally posted by dpabrams:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bloodstar44:
I don't have anything at all about games on Fourth Reich between some other ragheads
but you must realise that we don't have HISTORICAL DISTANCE like in WW2 case.So spare me your pathetic tirrade. Why we don't have anything against Third Reich games? Just because this historical distance is there.
And I didn't made up lousy sales in Europe of CM: SF. Politics aside.
Hmmm...somehow I see "locked thread" sign in a distance
Star Buddy,
Give it up. Not having a point and speaking lousy English is another handicap. Maybe you should learn Arabic. Better yet read, "America Alone" by Mark Stein, if you people aren't burning copies of it yet. </font>
-
I think they are concerned about the fact that the game is bargain bin cheap only two months or so after it's release, which means it is not doing well.Originally posted by KNac:The ultimate thread, whining about how the game is cheaper.
Well, I may get a second hard ciopy for cheap as I bought the digital d/l.
-
Still, that 1.04 patch better be made out of miracles if they are going to slow down the task of actually fixing the game in favor of modules for a broken game.
-
Good initial sales, perhaps. I'd like to see what sales have been from the day of release until now, and I have a hunch that sales for CMX2 modules are going to take a hit because of all the negative press. I would even venture to guess that the CMx2 WW2 game may even suffer because of this, especially since CMSF isn't going to be fixed (completely) anyway.Originally posted by Kineas:Good sales and lots of complaints on an internal forum. I don't see any tragedy.
-
That sounds like a good strategy, IMO.Originally posted by Manx:I intend to give BFC the benefit of the doubt with CM:SF and see how things stand after patch 1.04 or 1.05 (if there is one). If things haven't improved by then i really can't see the point in buying any future modules for it.
I'd take another look at the series again when CMx2:WWII appears.
-
It's really no mystery as to why prices are falling so dramatically.
CMSF is obviously succumbing to the bargain bin, due to a poor release, bad reviews, and an inherently niche market.
-
So, what I am reading is that the Battlefront team will essentially never completely fix their broken game, and all of us fans are SOL.
I am extremely dismayed, as I shelled out 60-something dollars for this game, only to learn it will never be fixed and is available for much cheaper elsewhere.
However, I also learned an important lesson. I will never again buy a BFC product out of good faith, and will wait a good, long time before making any future purchases of their products, just to ensure I will receive a decent product.
-
..And from another thread, Steve said they are to release a dozen patches.Originally posted by Redwolf:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Darkmath:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Lurker765:
Based on the comments by Steve in another thread the game is almost complete enough for them to move on to the next module. That implies that they believe the game is not in an early stage of development anymore.
Given the release rate and the large negative opinion from the initial release, we can wait the next module for a while.
</font> -
My point in the original thread was not whether or not CM:SF was a good game or not (Which I personally feel it is), but the impact a broad base of bad mainstream reviews can have on a game, particularly when this was supposed to be Battlefront's bid for the mainstream.
-
I can like a game, and have the entire series fail due to a poor release and a reputation hit. Do not confuse subjective likes and dislikes with the objective consequences of a very poor release for what is normally considered to be a golden child of the gaming world.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:Heh.
So ... what are we worrying about then?
If you like the game, play and be happy.
If you don't like it, well then you could worry.
But PC Gamer doesn't like it so now we worry!?
c3k, I also think that some reviewers have put on the kid gloves because of Battlefront's good record. Hopefully the next game in the series will be a good release, otherwise we will see a much more brutal treatment of the game in the reviews.
-
Anyone remember this thread, particularly how I stated I would start to worry if PC Gamer gives the game a bad review?
Well, it seems PC Gamer has given Combat Mission: Shock Force a 50, a score even worse than IGN by two points.
I think I will start to worry now. Here is a link to Metacritic, has the PC Gamer score and a snippet.
-
That video sounds interesting, care to give a link?
-
A night out with The_Cap. </font>Originally posted by Abbott:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by molotov_billy:
what do I win!
-
Now THAT would make a good narrative for the Capt to cook up.Take a look at Phillip's thread - we await your story explaining as to why the 30 ton infantry fighting vehicle was also invisible a mere 10 feet away, or why a US infantryman got so close to an enemy ATGM that their models were actually interpenetrating - and yet *neither* unit saw the other. As an additional element of flavor to your narrative - they were close enough for the soldier's M4 to be about two-thirds of the way up the ATGM gunner's anal cavity.
But I don't understand what this has to do with tactical wargaming. When I'm in command of a Stryker Platoon in CM:SF I don't give a flying fig how much money was spent equipping my guys because a $5 RPG can rip through my rides pretty effectively if I don't pay attention to good tactics.
Will somebody finally clarify air gaurd.
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
No word from Battlefront yet as to when or if this will be addressed?