sburke

Quote of the day- that one earned an actual snort.

and just cause we got on the subject of blues...okay yeah I started it I got to see this dude from about 15 feet away at Mountain Winery in Saratoga before they remodeled it. Bleachers and a plain old stage. And lest we forget - a master bluesman and major musical loss - play it Stevie! I remember being fascinated by the fact that he never, ever seemed to be...lost in any way...It was as though he never took a breather...or took a pause to think where he was gonna go next, it just flowed out of him. It's going to be a long time before anyone that brilliant will come along again. Eric Clapton

ah one should never box yourself in. Generally I steer clear of most pop, but this young woman is a pretty darn impressive performer - yeah may be dating myself calling her young, but hey she wasn't old enough to be singing when I was in high school. Here is a band I just happened to wander upon playing in Dallas Alley in - you guessed it Dallas - back in the mid 1990's - Outstanding live Blues performers Gracie Moon

ToE export from a finished scenario to be used for import to a new - would be really useful to create campaigns using an op layer instead of trying to figure losses etc

bait and switch LOL

Okay enough of those depressing doom riddled psalm like dirges. (I was gonna post a Jerry Garcia version, but figured that might be too much). Rock on Bertha!

Nah that is just a very old uncorrected statement. Iron has never been like that. As to the AI question, that is correct the Fog of war is irrelevant to the AI, however coding in the FOW for a unit that is supposed to be under your control but out of C2 is not a minor deal. That would have to be added as more overhead to identify during the spotting cycles which units can report their info to you and when. Anyway this seems to be pointless. I really don't want to rain on your parade, if folks want this on their wish list, have at it. To set expectations though, BF does not often respond to users suggestions - they commented on that recently as to how much time that would eat up for them. I'll see if I can't find the post.

It is my feeble recollection that essentially bunkers are run by vehicle mechanics so I think the answer is they probably can't surrender until forced to exit. I know I have never seen them surrender while still occupying the bunker.

yeah like the Rhapsody!

as an off map modifier you are more likely to get success. As an on board option, they would first have to create the capability. Right now EW is just a setting, there is no in game unit functionality. Simpler is better when asking for stuff.

these are all apples to orange comparisons. I can try and address them individually, but you'd likely just have more. The AI Plan the designer creates can accommodate much of these to some degree, not all but some. However if you start including more options to actually neuter the AI - yeah, BF is going to say no. And you never addressed the main point - this is a LOT of work. The number of users who would really want this is likely too small a subset. ergo it is not likely to happen. You are however more then entitled to keep wishing and asking.

So that is the view of the marina eh?

not to be the downer on the parade, but the coding effort involved means this is highly unlikely ever to happen. BF always evaluates effort versus demand/return. This one is a lot of effort recoding AI not to mention the fog of war aspect and the friendly fire just mentioned. The number of players who function on iron versus something requiring even more micro management is just not going to be something for the mass of the user base. Just trying to set expectations. None of these rules could be applied to the AI, it just isn't that smart and according to BF most of the user community is single player only.

Mods are cool http://images.popmatters.com/misc_art/m/mods-splsh.jpg

you can apply those rules yourself now, no need for special game rules. Can't give orders to s unit out of C2? Then don't. For the AI though this would be a disaster, it can't think to that degree so as a starting point we will agree this is human behavior only. If there is nothing stopping you from applying those standards now, why would you need BF to develop the programming for it?

sounds more like the plaintive mating cry of an STD laden Boo

Was in Addis Ababa last week. Drove past a herd of goats. Reminded me of this place except those were young.

me too, I wanted to do a Blackhawk down scenario. I just don't want to invest that effort until CMSF2 is out. . . . Someday.

suit yourself On the subject of hi def files, this has been brought up by folks who created them and I believe they can in fact have an impact. I make no assumptions as to what users have and neither does BF which is why they work as hard as they can to optimize the game to run on the full range of what their users have. Yeah BF is lazy, lol. You have no idea. These guys work incredibly hard, but there are only so many hours in a day and days in a week. Realistic project management trumps gamer fantasies any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Not trying to be rude there, but the BF team really does work their asses off, accusing them of being lazy is a statement of ignorance. Accuse them of being short handed and you might be closer to the mark.

While play testing a scenario for CMBS I had a team receive fire while moving in the open from an enemy unit in a building. The tam paused, drilled the guy firing on them. Proceeded to their objective. 2 of the team took up positions facing the direction they had received fire from, I stll have the pic on my home PC. Soft factors can totally change your experience, they are there to allow us to simulate different quality troops. Use the settings.

Hot seat and you can do that with any difficulty level.

Just you, Chris was jumping ahead on the video and missed the left hand vehicle firing.

Agreed, nice to see you have a fever. The shots are excellent.

Dad?! Is that you? It's me, Luke Dad!