sburke

@Kohlenklau, that is so underhandedly sneaky appealing to my better half. Well played...grrrr The most important thing Steve said however was left off I have never been disappointed by a BF release. Does that mean I don't always want more, whether in features or content, absolutely not. I'm getting old man. I want them to release everything now before I am consigned to drooling on my keyboard and asking "where's my mush?" Still I can't keep up with the content at the rate they are releasing now.

In Venafro I was trying to use fallen trees and rubble to create a fallen power pole (two trees with the gap between covered by rubble. Now I know why the rubble kept disappearing. Thanks Jon!

me either. Damn now I have to go buy a prayer rug. kohlenkau, you are certainly entitled to your opinion as am I. Sorry if it bothers you but I get tired of hearing people second guess BF's business decisions all the time and I am entitled to voice that opinion. If it bothers you put me on your ignore list if you desire, that is your choice.

part of the issue with historical battles is the fow aspect at the operational level is non existent. I personally do like seeing historical battles just because it helps to understand to some degree why the fight went the way it did. As to balance, make that a minority of 4. Broadsword and I don't fight "balanced" battles. We fight what we consider to be interesting. The balance is derived from the impact on our larger campaign i.e. can the defender hold out long enough or inflict enough casualties to alter events at the op layer. and just because - We can never have too many good maps, they can always be adapted for other scenarios so making one is never a bad idea.

Alright I'll retract that, there is nothing I can find on a search. I apologize for mis-stating your position on CMx2.

Hey he is at least consistent (at least on this), at last report he wouldn't even play CMx2.

It also doesn't help that your position seems to hop back and forth like a little kid needing to urinate. First you say CMBB sales were lower because of "questionable game mechanics", then you say CMBB is better because of significant codes changes and fixes. Those code changes wouldn't happen to include questionable game mechanics would they? Hey your words man, I am just trying to make sense of them and failing.

I didn't "just" delete them. Perhaps you just missed my previous response. I'd hate to think you just ignored it.

Bil on defense vs c3k on offence. My vote is cast

Actually I can read a post (your's included) and yes there is more nonsense there. I chose not to comment on your points A and B as there frankly wasn't anything to respond to. First you make a vague assertion followed by a simple opinion statement "CMBO was a) first, and in a different competitive environment and CMBB slowed down gameplay a lot, and with some questionable game mechanic decisions causing that." To which I answered with "unsubstantiated opinion masquerading as data". I think that pretty much covered it. Which left you only the friggin demo. Is there a larger Eastern Front than Western Front audience - hell if I know. I suspect Steve's opinion is based on more than just CMBO vs CMBB sales (though that is certainly some good hard data at least for a game at the tactical scale). I do know that Steve etal have far more experience in this regard and actual data to work from than I and I am sure quite a few friends in the industry. For me to consider second guessing them seems silly. Unless I have actual information to work from what's the point? I'd only end up making comments like, well like you. BF has survived in a tough market for what? 14 years now? In that time they made a huge risky strategic decision to go with a new engine in a modern context and more recently a new business model to insure that the money we all invest in their games has a continuing life span. I'd say they apparently know their base really well and their business success shows it. Can we stop second guessing them and just enjoy the fact that they are succeeding and they will eventually get to the Eastern Front (which I think I heard Steve say was his prefered theatre)? What's more when they get there the engine will be that much more stable and feature rich. I for one hope Steve is wrong and when they hit the Eastern front their sales turn out to far exceed their best expectations. Redwolf can pat himself on the back, Steve and Charles can chuckle al the way to the bank..and a good time will be had by all.

I can vouch on this one, I think the main reason for the perception is that for these projects Broadsword needs assistance. However we are finished one campaign and have another running currently in the CMBN time frame with another planned once MG is out that haven't needed any external input. The issues we are debating have more to do with working out how to manage reinforcements, C2 delays etc. If anything I worry that Broadsword will burn out from having too many pots boiling.

I don't bother with the text. I figure I can look at my own vehicle to see it's state. The text gets in the way of screenshots. As an aside I just had a bazooka team take out an mg in a bunker. I had to sidle my way up to it to make sure everyone was dead as the bunker was still intact. Gotta love that. I was cringing just waiting for one guy to pop up and mow down my team.

@Forward Observer, Yeah I understand that. Some Peeps love tanks, some just love the Eastern front (I can't wait to try a shot at Stalingrad myself having just finished STALINGRAD: How the Red Army Triumphed.) However it gets old hearing every decision BF ever makes critiqued from the cheap seats with a lot of high sounding unsubstantiated opinion. My two cents - I'd rather BF take their time. When they get to the Eastern front I think we all want urban combat to be a bit tougher and a lot more options for rubbled and fortified buildings, not to mention fire.

The problem with deciding on a position before you have the facts and then being completely unable to adjust your opinion when presented with facts is you continue to try and find "data" (in your case unsubstantiated opinion masquerading as data) that you think somehow supports your position even when said data is contradictory with what you have stated previously. It the end it just comes across as someone having an axe to grind and not really caring what is true or not. Really? The demo caused half as many people to buy CMBB over CMBO? That is your position? And that is based on what data that says how many people downloaded the demos of CMBO vs CMBB and how many proportionally chose to buy? Oh right, you don't actually have that data.

Granted he meant if anything like his previous books but I am not sure how he could have been any clearer other than to say Redwolf I do not have this yet, but it might be good. I only say that because his other books were good, but I have not read it yet so we don't really know.

only if both projects require the same resources in question. If project A only requires the resources of team 1 and project B based on it's state only requires the resources of team 2 then the answer is no. Considering neither you nor any of us out here really know the answer to that, it is kind of a mute point... or red herring. And regardless of it is true or not, it is BF's decision right?

LOL it is fitting that Cliff be in the tea party, maybe he is just character typed

LOL in that case the gas station is responsible as they handle the product and delivery (the pump). In your case if we assume it is a corrupted install (which we don't know for sure, I would withhold judgement until you talk to tech support) the medium getting the file to you is not controlled by BF. File download issues do happen from time to time. All I am saying is talk to tech support, don't make a judgement till you have all the facts before you. You are frustrated now and yeah I get that, but until you actually talk to them you don't know that you are out of options. You could be venting in a major way only to find out there is a simple answer and a quick fix.

Man you are sounding like Eeyore LOL You aren't the first to be in this position. Talk to BF, you haven't even given them a chance yet. Your problem wasn't caused by them and they can help you out. Next time though back up your install file, actually back it up in multiple places.

Before you rant you might want to open a ticket with the helpdesk. It sounds like you had a technical issue and instead of trying to get it resolved are just assuming everyone else will have your experience. In reality I don't think I know of anyone who has quite had your experience. The module is worth it, just get some help resolving your issue and I think you will actually agree. edit 1 -huh just noticed this is actually one of an identical pair you posted. Seriously, go to the support desk. It'll save embarrassment later. edit 2 dang okay 3 identical posts, one in the support desk area... persistent anyway.

well worth it though, looking really good.

Actual news :The Sheriff of Oosterbeek - A Scenario Design DAR/AAR versus the sputterings of those who love to predict BF's demise or point out their lack of judgement despite which they are somehow still quite successful.

a direct result of the player as god. Things that would take several minutes at minimum to communicate and coordinate among a squad much less a company are accomplished instantly. You want realism, then enforce your own C2 delays. Use runners to make sure physically information is passed, make your platoon commander visit all his squads prior to launching an attack. You'll find you need to edit the scenario to extend the time and you'll spend a lot of time running guys around to talk to other guys. It might be interesting a few times, but I doubt anyone will want that all the time.

I've seen this and recently- my assumption is that in turning it has altered the LOS of whomever in the vehicle could spot the target and now they do not have LOS. This is especially true when you are up against hedgerow. It could simply mean the viewer who might have been directly up against the hedgerow is now a short distance behind.

How do you verify that? Curious as my impression is they do block LOS. Can you give a sample test to show this? I am not sure what you mean by the above.