sburke

CM::NW Nuclear War. I predict to have poor sales and be by far the most boring CM Battlefront could ever consider releasing. The good news is, you could play a couple games of it in an evening easily.

3.0 should give you a whole lot better experience, but follow the directions included on the read me or you will likely frustrate yourself again.

It will have to come. Part of the issue is the telecom infrastructure. AT&T sends more maintaining the digital/analog infrastructure than they do the new IP backbone. The FCC last year announced the US is going to move off those as a matter of policy. AT&T has a goal of moving 75% of their customers to all IP by 2020. Most of your businesses still run on ISDN and other digital formats or analog. That is a huge shift.

almost I expect being the key word there.

your above directions aren't right. CMFI is base game 1,12 is a patch 3.0 is an upgrade where in that cycle did you load Gustav Line? There is no combined 3.0, GL bundle. It sounds like you don't have Gustav Line, just the base game upgraded to 3.0. Yeah just watched the video, you do not have the Gustav Line module. That would be this http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage_bfc&product_id=351&category_id=37&manufacturer_id=0&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=26

i use picassa for cropping and fraps for the screenshots - piece o cake!

there is some allowance for trees not being a solid object.

and I don't wake up next to a girl who looks at me with that horrified look in her eyes of "I slept with that, a gamer!!".

As suggested above, take a QB and play hot seat or take one scenario you have already played and try playing it in scenario editor mode. This will allow you to see when and why your units are being spotted or not spotting the enemy. You definitely want to learn and apply real world tactics, but you also need to learn the mechanics of how the game functions as well. Learning how the various commands and tools work is critical to understanding how to implement the tactics you gain a theoretical understanding of. Most of all though, just have fun with it

Yeah I was surprised the first time I tried that as well, they create a helluva curtain at a good distance away.

Wait, what were we talking about? Interview article today with Strelkov, interesting in that his assertion is Putin is trapped on Ukraine issue. He gives a history to his own actions and while they may or may not be factual, it is an interesting plot line in terms of the OP. In essence the position is one where getting out is inherently as difficult as just upping the ante. Strelkov doesn't really elaborate, but the plot line in CMBS of multiple parties all reacting from different perceptions becomes more and more plausible. Even the NATO head is warning that military aid is inherently risky as we need to judge what that will mean in Russia. Whether one agrees with the Russian position or not or even whether one considers it justified or not, it still needs to be weighed in the equation of what is the end goal. I think most of us feel the spring is going to determine whether this escalates. The current separatist offensive appears to have slowed for whatever reasons. While they might feel a bit optimistic, they have also extended the frontline in a way they will find difficult to defend without serious continued aid. Western military aid is too late to assist in the current situation, it would be more targeted to helping Ukraine come spring. That aid in turn ups the ante for what Russia feels it needs to put forward to accomplish it's goals which aren't even clear. There was another interesting article of a worst case for Russian foreign policy and that is what if Germany gets drawn into a position of actively contributing to Ukraine's defense. The position put out in this article is the nature of US-Russian relations is global. There is more on the table there and less of a direct U.S. Interest in Eastern Europe. Germany however has long history both good and bad going back centuries of relations with Eastern Europe. What Russia potentially risks is something similar to China regarding Japan, a tipping point where the inertia since WW2 of asserting a role that is mostly remembered from that one war is overcome. Both Germany and Japan have a much longer history of political and military involvement that has been temporairily set aside after the horrors of the Second World War. Russia may very well succeed in bringing Germany out of the defensive stance it has maintained for 70 years.

You can argue that point with Steve if you like, just trying to make you aware that you are skirting the edge fair, unfair or whatever. I don't make the rules, just observing.

He is giving you good advice skinfaxi, you do not want to push Steve on this, he will ban you. You already have the one warning, you aren't likely to get a second.

I use them to run a drone. They usually have good capability for on call assets so it makes for a good combination...and I tuck the vehicle way out of harms range.

I mostly use CMSF for mout combat stuff for the insurgency. I suspect I will end up mostly doing my own hypothetical stuff with CMBS unrelated to events in Ukraine.

UAVs are always at map edge and it seems there is a generic blast size for aircraft of all types. The presumption of UAVs is they are observing off map at an angle to target area not sitting flying directly overhead of where you asked them to spot. Kind of like this, the operator launches the UAV and maintains flight over the "friendly" map edge and observes from that location to wherever you want it to spot. Intervening mountain? No problem, the UAV has super vision. It's more of a mechanical aspect for coding than an actual aspect for the information provided. You'll notice it if you get AA fire against your UAVs, the target area will always be the same. Regarding spotting times etc, I think folks may have a false sense of what you can actually do with a UAV. It isn't the magic eye in the sky that instantaneously provides a full spectrum picture. Be nice if someone with RL experience could jump in on how they do work and whether the spotting timing and behavior in CM matches their experience. It is a new feature so it is subject to review as new data comes in, but it has to be real data not supposition about how someone's go pro works watching their neighbors backyard.

Steve has pretty much expressed a general disinterest in doing anything in the pacific theater including WW2 to the present. We continue to gang up on him, but so far with no success. Polls are somewhat difficult as they represent a small minority of CM gamers. I think the current "how do you play" poll is a good example. The number of responders is really small. And welcome to the forum.

I believe you have to buy the upgrade as you need a 3.0 key for the full installer. When you download the 3.0 upgrade, it will be the full installer updated to 3.11. I would check with the helpdesk just to confirm the 3.0 upgrade requirement though to be sure.

I would hesitate to use the expression gamey. Gamey to me signifies more a player doing stuff outside of the theoretically agreed upon terms of a game between two players. That standard changes depending on the players themselves. I expect what you are more seeing is an issue of design experience. One of the best parts of being a beta tester is you have a very tight community to learn from. You also get a test environment of a lot of people helping you try to iron out your design, review the briefing, do all the cool map portions of the briefing etc. creating a scenario without all that help leads to some uneven results. Rather than refer to stuff as gamey, I think a more constructive and positive approach would be better to avoid discouraging someone. The setup zone one is I think a good example. Having reinforcements potentially appear right in the middle of a players force is not good design ( unless you are springing an ambush in a Vietnamese jungle). The designer does have to take into account where a player might be able to get to unexpectedly. Moving along the sidelines is really scenario dependent. Some times you do need to take into account the limitations of the AI in movement so we would need to be more specific in that item to see if it adds to the scenario design or not. I am far from being an expert at designing, but one thing I think I do appreciate is how difficult really good design is. It takes a lot of patient feedback to help someone interested in doing design improve their skills and considering how few have ventured to do so it is worth the effort.

Unpredictability is the nature of combat. One of the good things about CM is you can try to do something, but there isn't a guarantee ever that doing a particular sequence will always produce the same result. While there are times I get frustrated with pathing issues, actual combat orders and the TAC AI usually work pretty good. Breach CMBN Breach CMSF

well there is still time. Putin doesn't appear to have gotten any smarter.

LOL we have all wanted to rant at some point or another over our pixeltruppen. I get over it by watching and noting when they do things right, and I don't mean just in the sense of the way I ordered them to. Example This team was ordered into this building, on the way they took fire from a guy in the building to the left. They paused on their own, eliminated the enemy, then proceeded to their objective. Now note, from the left guy number 1 and guy number 5. They have taken a position with their weapons trained on the last known position they took fire from. The TAC AI might not always do what you want, but it is far from stupid. I actually prefer the infantry TAC AI to the vehicle TAC AI.

Yep. Has made my journey with Battlefront's games a helluva lot more rewarding.

If you pay close attention, AD is firing at precise off map locations, if it strikes you will see the resulting explosion. If it is a fast mover there is even a chance of crashing on map. Makes a nice hole. I was able once to actually see a fast mover crossing a map when on max zoom out overhead. (No you don't get to see an aircraft, just a dot). UAVs are a whole other kettle of fish. I have very frequently seen missiles coming from attack choppers right down the bearing my AA just fired (and apparently missed).

May want to decide first where you think you want the campaign to run and scale. For example you could fight a campaign just based on some of the airborne drops over a 2 day period versus trying to redo all of Normandy. Your decisions will likely carry more weight then as well. Broadsword used the St Lo board game and that did work very well.