sburke

seems to be working, but I'll leave that to folks who use this regularly to say.

oh it seems steve just did an update, that was the forum blip. He announced it in another thread

Yeah seems the website did an update. It was inaccessible to me for a few minutes. So if I get you right you'd want to take for example that 15x19km map, divide it in sections and make Master maps correct. Just for the moment I am assuming you are there is one issue and Broadsword and I found this fairly early. You never know until you launch the campaign what maps you'll need. So for our St Lo campaign the game map covered.11 x 7 km I think at least for the area covered by the fighting. Now keep in mind this was CM x2 1.0 when map limitations were even more severe. We quickly realized that making maps to cover 77 sq kms when we didn't actually know where the battlers would be fought made no sense so we instead used the game map as an op layer and when a battle came up that looked worth our effort a map was then produced and the battle fought and the results applied to the op layer. Pretty much the same technique as everyone else has done. No one has considered mapping the entire area and then playing it as you don't know the boundaries of the fight. Suppose your battle is on the edges of two master maps - you now have to create a new map that covers areas on those two maps. A lot of us have been down this road. Again making maps is labor intensive and rarely is anyone interested in making one that is not defined to actually have a battle on it. I may be the exception I sometimes make maps just to see what it might look like to stand on that battlefield.

They have and those efforts keep failing as the work required is more than folks are quite willing to admit. I ante'd up for that last round and even that didn't show the level of community commitment that folks keep insisting is there. The reality hits hard when you start asking for people to commit hard dollars and they don't. The last major effort was this. It suffered for a lot of different reasons including a simple lack of experience in pitching it and poor communications of the project. Despite that it has not died and you can find the link in the thread to the forum where development continues. This is now 3 years in the making and the single biggest issue of how to take that Op layer and connect it back to CM is as far as I can tell something they haven't even begun to tackle. BF's issue isn't letting us help them grow, it is preventing us from bankrupting the company with unrealistic expectations. Considering how much people b***h when asked to pay $10 for an upgrade color me skeptical that this community is gonna ride to BF's rescue showering them with donations.

Map making is labor intensive so you'd have to define this a little better. What is CM2 compatible? There is no such things as importing a map. It has to be made in CM so that map you are referring to is as good as any for making overlays. So in essence all you can do now is define a map to be the focus of a campaign and therefore done in CM as individual maps which is a process folks have already done many times. The issue isn't usually the maps, it is the campaign system that guides the Op layer of movement and opportunity that is the main impediment. As early as the 1st release of CMBN - LLF and Broadsword were both building maps to cover the frontage around St Lo and Broadsword and I did a campaign based on the St Lo boardgame (see my sig..) Not sure what your suggestion is different than that.

Personally RPGs are my worst nightmare. Even the uncons are well loaded with them and they are deadly. You look like you are getting fire superiority, your men are pouring it on and then one lone guy smacks one into your building and the best you can hope for is light casualties and being suppressed for a while. The US units don't really have anything as effective. The Marine SMAW is close but not as prolific or quite the punch.

I am not sure why that is a guessing game for you. Once you know the key you should be using you shouldn't have to guess anymore. Downloading the full installer if you have not bought anything new should use the same key. If you bought something new you use the new key. Are you using the full installer or are you referring back to previous experience?

BF has explained their rationale for not opening up the ToE for modifying. It was a pretty good explanation as I recall and either way clearly laid out why they won't do it regardless of whether it was a simple thing for them to permit or not.

I don’t think anyone would disagree but currently it is an engine limitation.

Before we get into tone, English may not be his first language. The ToE merits can stand on their own for CM and ASLveteran’s post is about as clear as one can get on the subject.

Lol love it

yeah that could have been me they took the shot of doing that. Instead that poor woman is now eternally famous on the internet.

So I am looking through this game to use as a OP layer for a campaign with my PBEM partner. Montélimar - The Anvil of Fate. The game rules have a Mulligan chit. For the Americans it is called Bourbon, for the Germans Cognac. Being primarily a wine drinker I need guidance. Here is what they recommend. If I am going to drink when using these rules, are these good suggestions and do you have better? And yes this is straight out of the rule book. Almost worth buying the game just for this to support them! And if I hear another person complain about the price of combat mission after looking at the cost these days of board games! ($109 for this though it is pretty - and my cats would love it ). Optional - but a great Command and Control aid as well as being enjoyable: We recommend the following Bourbon for the American Player to enjoy while playing: Bulleit Frontier Whiskey Barrel Strength. Great hint of toffee and oak. We recommend the following Cognac for the German Player to enjoy while playing: HINE Bonneuil 2005 – pricey but worth it.

Don't take me as the final word, but the models for CM have all been redone so if you have mods for soldiers or vehicles for sure they will no longer work. UI is also conforming to current so anything that took advantage of CMSF specific stuff likely won't work. So no you can't just rename uniforms for example as they will no longer fit the models they apply to. Sound mods may, though they might possibly need some renaming generally I think they probably don't. I use some but honestly considering what I focus on in playing I could easily have missed some items. Kieme's buildings that I know you use do still work.

My employer has all these rules about social media that make a crappy experience even worse. I hear ya Aragorn I am on Facebook but have really cut down what I actually do. I swear text messaging is more useful to me.

understood, but again once you do the full installer you don't have to think about that anymore. Luke go to the dark side......

just for reference to your original post- Flaws versus what makes sense are 2 different issues as other folks have posted. I suspect some of the discrepancy here is your perspective on cost versus detail compared to what the cost would really be if the level of detail you are looking for was there. It would be a lot more expensive. As ASL Vet noted there is art work, models and ToEs would have to be altered and expanded extensively. So you'd have to have ToEs on a division by division basis and also over time as ToEs change. If they actually did create such a game I think considering CMBN was released 7 years ago and it took you that long to pony up (kidding, for all I know you only started looking at it last year ) you'd be highly unlikely to purchase a game which would easily cost 2 - 3 times as much - and it would cost that much. For sure a lot of their current customer base would not do so. I.E the product would fail and there would be no CM at all. Watch what you wish for and be realistic as to what other folks would pay for and consider of value. The idea of CM is to give you as detailed a tactical combat experience as possible given the constraints. At the price it is unparalleled. The home page does list everything that comes in each game - weapons, vehicles etc so this is information you should have known prior to purchase. http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=276&Itemid=460 CM does not have a ToE for the 716th ID so it can't be considered flawed in that regard. It is a semi generic infantry battalion with some variability based on settings of unit quality. The only issue is it can not create the ToE at that level of detail for the 716th ID. It never claimed that it could and in fact by the ToE posted specifically made clear it could not.

Just to set the right baseline- there is no freaky patch items anymore - you install the full dl and you will always be up to date. The full installer is always current. Pretty much the same as steam as it just reinstalls in my experience. So no real value add there - and you can reinstall at will. The advantage we currently have is I can keep a copy of the full installer locally and reinstall as often as I want w/o internet access. Maybe I can do that with Steam, but to date that hasn't been my experience. I have a couple games on steam and reloading them for me is a pain as I am now driven to a long DL.

Big Brother MS would never do that..... okay yeah they would. Worth a look.

that is correct, but a mod should not prohibit a scenario playing. Mods are user oriented and not part of a save file etc. When you create a campaign or scenario your modes will only alter what you see. I can load that same scenario/campaign without them. It won't alter game play, jus tth evisuals. If someone created a campaign that needs the visual that come from a mod they would have to redo them for the effect, but it wouldn't stop anyone from launching it. In terms of the mods there are a few that will work like Kieme's building mod, but for the most part you should assume any mod for CMSF will not work in CMSF2.

He shouldn't have to port. The goal is CMSF2 will run anything created in CMSF. It won't have any of the additional AI capabilities in 4.0, but it should be playable.

Spray and pray is not a winning recipe for achieving fire superiority.

Half the time I play just to look at stuff like this. Nice shots Bil

Now now, that kind of info has to come from the man behind the curtain.

Controversial may be a strong term. I think overall because we are all so invested in the game/tactics and these discussions we tend to get a little wrapped up in them. Yes there have been campaigns that have a recon portion - Kampfgruppe Engle if my fading memory is accurate starts with a recon mission that has implications for the next battle. However it is not a long range spot em type mission - it is short range night time infantry oriented and includes combat. I know you really enjoy campaigns, can you point out one specifically that matches what you are suggesting? It would likely help focus this a little more than hypothetical ideas. Doesn't matter if it is WW2 or more current though obviously for the specific point of modern vehicles it would help if it were in either CMSF or CMBS. I am one of those people who does enjoy uniquely designed scenarios and doesn't have to have constant action however I don't off hand know any that fit what I think you are suggesting.