sburke

Not at all (coming off as a whiner). The problem is simply this as noted is extremely subjective. Even assuming everyone agrees the behavior changed, it still leaves the question as to whether that is good or bad. The first step is to establish a baseline of the behavior and then I think one has to depend on the veterans on the forum to understand what might be normal behavior in their experience which honestly may also be very subjective. I don't think you will find anyone here who feels the subject is unimportant, if anything the hope is to get it as solidly as one can on target including with different experience and morale settings.

As c3k noted above, anecdotal information and complaints even if heard won't produce a response. Hell we complain about stuff all the time. The only thing that will produce change is repeatable data examples. Even in this thread there isn't agreement on the behavior being off or what it should be. I know I have my own opinion, but it is no more valid than anyone else's who might completely disagree with me.

I can definitely say in 3.0 that infantry would run from buildings under even 81 mm fire. It was a frustrating item in trying to design Frosty Welcome for the Market Garden module so as noted prior actual testing is the only thing BF has ever listened to. Anecdotal info doesn't get a response.

oops

uh oh...... you went and done it now Mikey....

she turned me down - said something to the effect that maintaining my genes in the pool was not a good benefit for survival of the species. I didn't have the killer instinct of a UFC fighter. I think it was the cap. @PanzerMikeyou bastard.

LOL let it go Mikey....Women in CMBS is one I think we can answer- no BFC is not going to be interested. It adds nothing for the game itself, is out of timeline and is just work to no end. Women in the military is something we will have to see unfold. The US doesn't even enforce draft registration though it may end up causing penalties if you apply for certain federal programs. The Senate considered requiring women to register, but dropped it. Neither party supports conscription so the whole subject is kind of a non starter. It is more one of those conversations you start that really has no point other than to get you unfriended by women you met on the internet that you apparently intended to provoke. Too bad cause I know hella feminist and she is really cool, has the best beer selection, killer weed and can bbq like nobody's business. On top of that she is a tax whiz, saves me thousands every year, is a kick ass contractor - added a wing on my house for next to nothing and stellar work... and oh yeah is a fantastic car mechanic so I never have to pay for auto work. Just sayin....

I am beginning to understand why you were unfriended if the above series of comments were any indication of how you carried on that conversation with your feminist ex-friend. Regarding women in combat- you have seen the articles on Kurdish female units I assume? Rather get into this dead end hypothetical stereotyping what women might actually contribute, why not look at the real world or better yet let's just watch Ripley in Alien movies kick monster creature butt! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_Protection_Units

The problem with this is there are some issues specific to CM that affect how this plays out. Entrenchments in CM are pretty readily visible. Maybe that is to be expected, but the result is it becomes very easy to spot where an enemy is positioned then drop some arty knowing if they are there they will bail out and run around in the shrapnel rain. A simple short barrage on a platoon position with an 81 mm mortar battery will cause them to vacate their position and run around in the open. I would not expect that to be normal behavior for soldiers being hit by 81 mm fire. A player can prevent this behavior on their own units in the defense (just give them a pause command). The AI is stuck with the behavior. Whether it makes a campaign unplayable is a whole other issue. How much of the campaign is dependent on that specific situation is going to vary if it happens at all. Considering the AI was already stuck not being able to issue hide commands when needed it further limits the impact caused specifically by this behavior- the AI was already screwed.

+50

You voted for Trump?! I unfriend you! Lol kidding. 2 seperate issues I think. The reality is women are moving into combat roles and more and more you will see a change in gender in the military. If there is a draft then obviously they would have to be included. In terms of CMBS though, it is a specific theoretical war in a theoretical time frame that is already here and women in combat roles is still limited. Not worth BF doing the model frames to try and represent them as distinctive units. And then I don't have to see some bozo decide nude women needs to be a mod for CM....and it would happen.

It is more likely that they will find the most rare Pokémon go character is in Beijing and Japan invades to go after it.

No way, that NEVER happpens!! ?

I agree with Ian that would be too extreme, but my practice is armor crews once I regain control head for safety. Personal choice to maintain my in game immersion

sorry man I was still kind of freaked out - and it could very well be a VBIED that didn't go off. Don't count on it doing the same for you oh and I am not 100% sure this is the updated. I decided not to verify by starting over after a beginning like that so I'll be trying again after this run just to see. . . and I won't tell any one here what the next one does.

*****************************************************SPOILER ALERT*********************************************************************************** This game never ceases to deliver. Trying out a run on the updated version of this. Turn 1 has the enemy sniper pop up and it wounds one of my guys. Not an auspicious start, but my return fire takes out somebody with this guy and suppresses the sniper. Not the best as I'd like him confirmed down but it gives me some breathing room. Turn 2 starts and my heart drops into a pit somewhere around my stomach as my sphincter squeezes tight it's escape route. No way buddy you are hanging in there with the rest of us and are gonna face this awful situation..... a cab comes roaring around the corner headed right for my men... and keeps coming and now I am just waiting for the blast that will take out my entire command. No one has fired. One guy is pulling a grenade but far too slow to do any good. My troops are all dead men that just don't know it yet. and somehow it drives right through my lines and heads down the road The turn ended there with my jaw on the floor and I couldn't but help recall some of the crazy stories I have read about Iraq. LLF you bastard, I'm getting old. My heart isn't what it used to be.

keep putting too many rules about what a scenario designer can or can't do for something they want to create and they'll stop creating. They obviously had something they wanted to do and forcing a sniper who was meant to be a holdout to trek across the map to get in position is one of those issues I could certainly understand why the designer did what they did. For all we know that sniper was standing around in civilian clothes watching your men and then at an appropriate moment went and grabbed his rifle out of hiding. LLF's classic Ramadi battle takes advantage of just the same thing for both yours and the enemy's units. Roll with it and stop worrying about what you think your units should have seen.

I always try to stay current on the full download, just makes reinstalling so much easier

I don't think it is just an issue of play balance As a dedicated team on a weapon do you think it unrealistic that another member of the team would immediately take over or is it just a matter of a few seconds delay longer you'd prefer? Now the immediate instantaneous occupation of the driver seat in a tank... well that is a different item.

Hell every kubelwagen is a Tiger in CM gaming.

That is at least partly because most players really don't want scenarios that are realistic. People want balance as a game. If we tried to play the normal kinds of engagements of WW2 we'd have a helluva a lot less Tigers running around

speak for yourself, my pixeltruppen are decrepit old men pulled out of retirement where they were sunning their rotund bellies on Miami beach while scarfing down plates of garlic fries. At least that is what it seems like.

first my cautionary note that I don't mind micro managing. I call it "flexibility". I like the idea. i'd be a little wary as unbuttoning is one of those commands I have come to be very careful about. Nothing ruins a tanks day like having the TC get shot..well short of being hit with an AT round anyway.

Other than during MG I can't think of many tactical battles where this was a relevant option. That is the rationale of BF not taking the time to code it for engineers. With HE it can be done but risks making a scenario a dead end if the bridge is critical to the battle. They are more useful as a choke point or a VIP objective.

Even if the above was true (and it seems it isn't ) I still don't think it would be a better game. There is a lot more about CM that is far superior to the eye candy in that game than just having a turn based capability. Just my two cents, kind of sick of the constant promotion of this product on Battlefront's forum. Do you guys not think that is kind of inappropriate? Ms Manners would be very disappointed with you.