sburke

@BletchlyGeek. Thank you. I won't comment on any specifics, but I will re affirm one item. I can't speak for anyone else, but I accepted the offer to beta test because CM is THE game for me, bar none. As small businessmen and indie game developers who have essentially defined their own nitch, I really admire what Charles and Steve have done. If I can contribute in any way at all to their success it feels good. It is nice to see the good guys win. And this game absolutely rocks, warts and all. I don't think anyone, BF included knows for sure future direction regarding content etc. BF has come a long way from 1999. They completely revised their engine into a much more capable, but also time consuming beast. They struggled through it's growing pains while also taking it in a completely different modern period (ballsy move if you ask me) before finally getting it really stable and then got even more ballsy by announcing a perpetual upgrade process. In that time they have also managed to grow the business fighting uphill against a huge downturn in the general economy. I can't say I know many businesses that have done that much to the very foundation of their business and succeeded. They might not have the billions that Apple has accumulated, but I'd go so far as to say they are every bit as creative and ambitious. (and nowhere near as annoying). Perhaps they will change their direction but for now the business model works and the designers and testers help BF keep to a tighter and tighter schedule while maintaining quality high and costs relatively low. It is a win/win for all of us. For fans of the game the future is very very bright.

say that when you are itching to retire..... she is wealthy enough I could retire 50 times over...and probaby finance a couple additional programmers for BF...yeah she looks really hot... damn that is a sad statement on my priorities getting older.

I think folks don't know the BF development process and any conjecture here is purely to kill time. Go play the game, it is a lot more fun than random thoughts on the forum.

Are you using vehicles or towed units? I tried a run with towed and yeah I am seeing the 20 mm run out faster as well. The vehicle mounts hold out longer on the ammo but become CAS bait which the towed units don't seem to.

In scen auth test mode you can't see the status of the air missions so you don't actually know if you shot down any aircraft. That doesn't invalidate your test from the perspective that perhaps the CAS is too effective, but it does invalidate it as to how effective the AAA is in terms of shooting aircraft down. Odd, I ran a couple turns just to watch the ammo expenditure. The quads start out with a helluva lot more but expend at a faster rate. Still what I was seeing (assuming both were firing the same amount of time) the 37 mm runs out sooner. There do appear to be some variables here one of which I don't understand. First is when they actually spot and fire. Not all units were firing during all CAS runs. the second and odder one is the pause. I am not sure what the pause is supposed to represent, but the units will all get a long pause say up to 30 seconds, but they can start firing before the pause runs down to zero. Crap I may have to read the manual assuming it is in there.

See my post above (#149). You have to test in hot seat mode to verify, but yes I had 1 of 3 flights show KO. Unfortunately there was no flaming wreckage to show the results so our Battalion commander thinks perhaps the gunners are giving themselves too much credit. As to the debate about 37mm vs 20 mm. As far as the game is concerned (and that is really all that counts here) the advantage for the quad 20 mm is they had more ammo and after a few runs all the single mount 37mms were dry and simply bait now for Russian aircraft. As to what accounted for the KO, no idea. I didn't even realize it had occurred till I checked the Russian FO to see status on the flights.

Out of curiosity because I have barely messed with air support in any of the WW 2 releases I decided to see what flak at least looks like. I set up 3 Panthers, a kubelwagen FO and 9 AA units of different types and 3 flights of Sturmoviks - 2 bombing, 1 strafing. They did 8 bomb runs and I think 5 - 6 strafing runs. The first flight was shot down (I assume that is what knocked out means in the UI). The bomb runs accounted for the kublwagen with a near miss. The strafing runs took out 3 flak units but in all fairness all but 2 of them were out of ammo now. No Panthers were hit. Not sure what the expected result would be as I rarely ever use them. The map was flat and devoid of cover.

My method of clearing woods is to look around, spot Ken's guys and tell them to go first. We'll be right behind you!

You had a shovel??!! ........

I assume from your comment that you are referring to the AI tanks and you are absolutely correct. There is no option for movement for the AI other than go from point A to point B. You can't back up unfortunately. Would be a very cool addition to the designers tool kit to have. Another contributing factor is the inability to issue a "face" command.

The base game (CMBN) is at 1.0. If you buy the CW module with it the version automatically becomes 1.10. To get 2.0 you have to purchase the 2.0 upgrade. I don't know all the bundle options, but at most you are looking at $10- It is well worth it.

oh yeah, pbem is really easy now. Even I can do it.

I think that would be ideal (at least the dismount option, the following would be a bit more an issue possibly). I don't know however how easy that is to code specific behavior based on nationality or even if BF is interested to try. Hopefully for CMBN/CMFI and the eventual Bulge game they can alter passenger behavior as none of those Western Front combatants would need Soviet style tank rider code. In the short term I think we just have to make sure our German riders dismount while still in cover. Honestly I can't say I have really successfully used Soviet style tank rider tactics in CM RT yet. Maybe I am too casualty adverse.

what everyone else said.... There is no direct comparison of CMBB to CMRT though you do have some familiarty with CMSF, the changes over the last few years and the difference in period make it a whole different game. Play the demos. I would have ranked CMFI as my least favorite if I had been asked without playing. As it turns out I spend more time messing around in CMFI than either CMRT or CMBN... go figure.

Back from the hairstyle discussion.. Regarding Tank riders - there are two different concepts folks are working from however tank riders as instituted by BF are very specific to apply to only one of them. To try and apply it to the second would break the first and the first is far more accurate and important (at least for CM:RT). Trying to develop a TAC AI for infantry that merely use the Tank as a means of transport and then design a capability to fight alongside is one thing and maybe for the Western Front BF might change behavior where troops would dismount as soon as they came under fire. (I'd vote for that.) For Soviet Tank Rider tactics however those boys need to hang on until right into the German lines. Any attempt to alter that behavior to accommodate using them just as transport would break the tank rider behavior making it difficult if not impossible for the player to emulate Soviet tank rider tactics.

LOL I was just going to offer that comment. That is the difficulty of designing. What works for one mode or one side can offer a completely different experience if you switch sides or modes. if I were to play this HTH the more experienced player should be on the German side. Those T 34 85s are killers and the terrain is not one where you can ambush a lot versus a human opponent. I found a one shot kill of the T 34s was rare while the Pz IVs were usually going up on the first shot. As others have noted you have to get multiple Pz IVs on each T 34 and you need to get first shot. At long range I generally found the Pz IVs would hit first, but if you don't put that T 34 down, it is going to kill you rather quick. I did win this one against the AI, but I am betting any even half way decent human player would have crushed me. I sympathize Giovanni but kudos to you for trying. The T34 85 is a very well designed tank - it hits hard, has good armor and mobility. On top of that there are usually a lot of them. Load times are comparable to German tanks as well. The Pz IV on the other hand is a very dated machine. Capable given the right circumstances and terrain, but definitely not the equal of the T 34 85.

brought to you by Mutual of Omaha. Hey Jim, go wrestle that tiger.

If you scroll all the way down on the left hand side bottom you'll see an info panel about the forum. One item says smilies are on, you can click that and it'll show you the basic icon options and their respective key strokes. Sorry hadn't caught that this one was page 2 already, my apologies heh an excuse to use another icon Lemme take a look, I know Steve has responded on this. I can't promise to spend too much time on it, but is one of those subjects that really is open to going either way.

Spent a lot of time on Beutezug's early versions and yes it is a very interesting scenario concept and was always a lot of fun in testing despite me repeatedly getting my a** handed to me. Totally agree the timer element knowing you need to get the job done and get the hell out of there is a really nice touch.

It usually doesn't do much good to wonder if BF's response or lack thereof implies anything. Sometimes Steve can be very active on the forum, other times he is a ghost. There is no telling what any particular day may bring and don't even bother wondering if it has anything to do with Combat Mission. Despite the rumors to the contrary he does have a real personal life too. Sometimes these things will be discussed on the beta forum and no one will comment as there simply isn't anything yet to comment on and sometimes as someone else noted they have been discussed ad nauseum in which case folks may just not feel inclined to repeat themselves. When bringing up a subject that you figure seems to be an obvious issue it usually makes sense to see what has already been said. Pretty easy to find good info, a search in google specific to the battlefront site will give you an idea of just how often it has come up and pertinent discussions. It may be you'll find a thread that is exactly along the lines of the frustration you have and commenting in that thread is sometimes more helpful at re-igniting a discussion than simply starting from scratch. ammo sharing site:battlefront.com As to my own opinion, don't really have a strong one. The number of times it affects me is relatively small and I have my own personal rules that tend to deter me from seeing it as an issue. Would I be opposed to a change, not really.

tank riding is not for the faint hearted, it isn't just a taxi ride. if you have not suppressed the defense you are pretty much dead meat. if in doubt you better have them dismount. adding the feature was specifically done for these guys so they behavior is crafted based on the goal of being able to emulate this tactic. Troops dropping off if they receive any fire would defeat the whole point. If you are using the tank rider function for anything else (increased mobility for standard troops) then you will have to make sure you don't take them into enemy LOF before dismounting.

much too early to say and considering 2.0 is a pay upgrade and as noted previously has major changes for bump maps that 3.0 doesn't have to do I'd be real hesitant to make a direct comparison. As to the question of flamethrowers, doubtful as that is a ToE item, but one never knows. Perhaps the direction of the 3.0 upgrade will not be directly comparable to 2.0. Only BF knows and I almost doubt they know yet.

Somebody spends an inordinate amount of time contemplating their navel and testing how far they can flick the accumulated lint. Curious, do you then test against the non-original navel... Navel lint flicking grog.

I can see him now clicking every last inch of the UI looking for other little gems.

What?! The cows are dead? Gary Larson will be quite upset.