sburke

Am I the only one that wants Canadians? Where is Ian? C'mon First Clash, Kenneth Macksey? no takers? Outstanding read. I've wanted to do the 4th CMBG ever since messing with MBT game.

wtf are you going on about now? Not exactly showing how you think the expression is benign. I should know better than to go down the rabbit hole with folks like you. and it is FROM the rooftop. Not OF the rooftop. christ.

suggestion, keep your racist BS and excuses to yourself. Question - did you send me a PM about this topic before injecting your half baked rationalizations? I'll save everyone the suspense. No. you did EXACTLY what you are criticizing me for doing. Hypocrite much? and for what it is worth - In 2011, after the term's offhand use in a March 26 article appearing in The Spectator ("white-coated Jap bloke"), the Minister of the Japanese Embassy in London protested that "most Japanese people find the word 'Japs' offensive, irrespective of the circumstances in which it is used".[16] Care to educate me some more on how Japanese feel?

Keep going, I won't mind it a bit when you get banned.

The problem with owning physical copies is 2 fold. First - CD drives are becoming increasingly rare. The gaming rig I just bought didn't even come with one. Hell my company won't even let us use USBs. The world is moving rapidly to a software only online market. Second - when is the last time you tried loading CMBN from CD then upgrade/patch it to 4.0? (most of which isn't available on CD). I wouldn't even want to consider it. I had done often enough for CMSF 1. I never want to go through that process again. I tossed all my CDs and now just keep the latest version of the full updater for all titles in 2 locations. One of which is online just in case of a catastrophic PC event. There is no difference between having an MP file or a game on your computer versus having physical media. You still have it in your possession and you still need a player. Online only games are a whole other thing and yeah I'm not too thrilled about going that route either.

says the guy with a Japanese sister in law that refers to Asians as slopes...last year. Yes we must be gentlemanly when addressing as we don't want our white sensibilities to be offended...

oh yeah common usage certainly means it isn't derogatory at all. That would never happen. Glad your sister in law can overlook the bigotry. yep certainly more proof.

No and in reality I assume they wouldn't hold back. Not much sense holding onto ammo if the enemy aircraft is attacking your troops. The stinger dudes on the other hand... volley firing off your entire ammo load for one aircraft is pretty excessive. There are a number of things you can do to control their access to ammo and how many crews you have positioned to fire. It's good practice to review everything you have and build a plan as to how to utilize those assets. The US campaign has at least one battle that is a couple hours long and the soviets have significant air assets. First time I played it I hadn't really experienced it yet. I think I was out of AA within 15 minutes. The rest of the battle was not fun.

really just last year? Recognizing bigotry is somehow "politically correct" Okay sign me up as being PC cause I hate frickin obnoxious arrogant racists. Racist slurs aren't acceptable in ANY form of English. Markshot, you may have started the thread, but there are forum standards that apply on every thread. I am sorry yours has had to deal with this, but it is what it is. I have not asked that anyone be blocked or have any other action taken, I have simply asked they stop using certain terminology. It seems that is too much for certain members of this community who'd prefer to continue to behave in a manner that reflects the worst in us rather than show a modicum of respect towards others.

nice, it is my fault for derailing a thread because you think it is okay to use racist terminology. And no I would not complain if someone interrupted my thread to point out language I was using was deeply offensive to their loved ones. JFC Erwin is it too much too recognize that the expression Jap is an extremely offensive slur? Why are you even bothering trying to defend it's use?

Honestly in testing I didn't really notice, but to be fair I use arcs and armor target commands to better prepare ambushes so likely wouldn't see it that much.

Or maybe I believe you are a racist and your referencing that Euro western dog whistle is pretty much proof.

that isn't an abbreviation, it is a racist slur. Ever call my wife a Jap when I am around and you'll lose a few teeth.

you can't. The best you can do and I highly recommend this, with stinger crews is in some scenarios you have a bunch of them, mount half in vehicles so they won't fire. They will burn through their ammo supply really fast to no real benefit otherwise

it is only 2 more letters to say Japan. Not sure if you have any idea how offensive that is to Japanese. It is not 1941 last I checked my calendar.

This is true. In effect it is move forward X meters maintain this formation as all units are given the same direction and distance. If you want a unit to do something in CM, you have to tell it that. The same is true in Command OPs at a different scale. You have to decide how you want to take an objective and give the appropriate orders. The game won't do that for you. And I micromanage the hell out of CM. It is actually how I get enjoyment. I watch every freakin pixeltruppen If you want to see how I approach the game, click the Hamel Valle link in my signature. It is the single best game of CM I think I ever played (meaning fun). It is against a human opponent but I take a similar approach all the time. Regarding TAC AI I think we have different definitions. What the TAC AI does in CM is different than what the AI does in Command Ops. Command OPs does not have to take into account things CM does and vice versa. Command OPs is 2D which totally changes what it has to factor in. If you want to defend a town in Command Ops, you move the unit into town and set a posture. You want to defend that town in CM, you better look at lanes for fire, cover, secondary positions, observation points for indirect fire and comms set up, assigning a reserve to respond where needed. CM is designed to have the player make decisions, not take the decision making out of the player's hands. For Command OPs at operational scale it is designed to allow the player to decide intent and the engine to try and apply. In essence you are a staff officer. Not criticizing, Command Ops is an outstanding game. Just a different cup of tea. And Combat mission units do make decisions on weapon type and target, not sure where you got the impression otherwise. Watch a sniper and note who they target. Just watch a Javelin equipped unit in CM Modern for a very very clear example. (or go back to that Hamel Vallee link, there are tons of examples - have I pitched that enough yet?) For the beta testers this is something that is always looked at, what is the behavior of a unit and is it appropriate especially if a new feature is added or weapon system.. It is also an area BF is constantly looking at to enhance as there most certainly are limitations. Would we like a game format that let you set more of a level of intent and reaction parameters, most certainly. We just don't have anything like that yet.

There is, it just has a different function. CM Tactical AI is pretty sophisticated however it is concentrated in determining how the AI reacts not to make decisions at the scale that Command Ops does. Watch your pixeltruppen. They'll do some pretty awesome stuff especially when they decide to ignore your orders because something happened that takes precedence. If there was no Tac AI in this game you'd find a lot of folks looking elsewhere and BF could churn out games a lot faster. Probably a better place to start would be defining what you mean by tactical AI because it most certainly exists in CM. It is not absent by design, it is in fact the heart of the game. And yes I have Command Ops. Just not an RTS guy so my interest flagged.

uh oh. Don't open that can of wo... aaargh too late!!! Steve would probably write a dissertation here on this, I'll settle for Different games, different systems.

That's fine and I likely agree with you. His point was the cursor does not provide a correct perspective. Wouldn't be the first thing to not quite be wysiwyg, but it is my time to waste and it really doesn't take that much time.

no it wasn't insinuated. It was outright said. or do you interpret this differently? And why do you care? Chuck's a big guy. He and I can disagree, no big deal. The stream as somebody illustrated is touched by the triangles of the impassable terrain. Not a bug as such. The cursor system is not perfect.

Really?

I'd suggest reading the full thread if you want a clue. it's in there. Though hardly worth the time. Nikolai had a concern. I offered to post it to BF, case closed. We can just let this thread go.

The point of bias wasn't a personal criticism. Just a statement that experience colors our perception. That a bug isn't fixed doesn't mean it hasn't been looked at nor a fix attempted. Hell look at the bridge issues that we have. Just when you think they might have gotten it, womp another vehicle decides to go underwater. You are being way too sensitive and umm I am not in customer relations. Thank god eh?

this is called bias. I can tell you as a matter of fact that yes many of the requests from these pages make it into the list for BF. I don't know the specific door issue you are referring to but I know of at least one where certain building configurations were recognized as a bug and added to the list. I don't think it is your place nor mine to tell a user what is or isn't a bug in BF's eyes or where it fits in the priority list. Best I can do as a beta tester with access to the ticketing system is to add it. Which many of us do.

I am pretty aware of that And as to whether BF considers that a bug or not, that is above my paygrade. hey wait a minute.. I get paid?