sburke

I think he may actually have been referring to us, not you guys... And in the interest of being completely honest, yeah we can come off that way sometimes. That the truth might be a little uncomfortable doesn't make it any less true.

Wait a dog gone minute here, you just devalued my purchase by 50% WTF? I paid for a product supposedly worth $10 damn it and I want my $10 value so you damn well better take my other $5!! Well now that you mention it, the backyard lawn is getting a bit high and my tanks are busy squishing JonS little stormtrooper wannabees into little piles of goo. God I love the 95 MM Churchill deathstars. You think you could give the mower a little go round?

Saw your post on the other thread as well. Funny cause if I had to have bet my house I would have been sure you guys had tried ASL and said -"what a pain in the friggin a**, can't a computer do all this for me?". Now it's clear, you never played ASL so you really don't know anything about wargames But getting back to the core point, this isn't about MP and Lobbys etc. No offense to the guys that are interested in that. Fundamentally I started the thread as I think the way you guys put together CMx2 and particularly the TAC AI has for me made CM even more unique in the genre than CMx1 if that is possible. More than anything else I think that is why for me the CMx1 discs have become collectible coasters. (no offense intended)

Of course, what did YOU think we meant? Advanced Senile Laggards?

BTW, Thanks for starting this thread. I think we can all pretty much say we'd rather have discussions like this then rant at one another over stuff that isn't going to change anyway.

+1 on that and thanks for the action report, I love this sort of stuff. Also to BF, this sort of thing is truly the meat of CM for I think pretty much all of us, the confusion and chaos of battle. I think this is why we continuously hear requests and criticisms of the information we get on spotting. It may be something difficult to code, but in terms of return in playability I personally feel it would add more than almost anything else you could do. Having information be more vague would add so much to the game for single players, HTH folks whether they play WeGo or RT. I may go over and post this in the wish list but this kind of thing would be cool Green units find it harder to ID more experienced units More experienced units would get more information quickly against green units The thinking here, green commanders do stupid s**t that makes them stand out, have less appreciation of cover etc. Experienced units would do things to make it difficult to know who is the leader, not have the radio guy running around too visibly etc. This would then add more to the psychology of battle as you wouldn't immediately know - hey that guy is a platoon commander- okay I pretty much know I am not facing a squad, where are the rest of them?

Exactly However one aspect I am always interested in is how much one soldier, or that one MG etc can affect the course of a battle so I definitely don't want to give up semi control over those units. If you checked out Broadsword and my AAR I tended to do the same. I focused on the positions and state of individual platoons as the basic maneuver element. I think this is essential in CM to get you in the habit of taking care of your units C2 at the base level. If you fail there, you are likely failing all the way up the chain.

LOL yes please. All around we have had a couple of threads now where we all got to vent our spleen. There is no right way vs wrong way here. I totally agree there is no clock to play against, but I don't think that is truly a WeGo versus RTS thing. RT is going to get pauses as well. What Wego does for me is stop me from realizing after moving one unit that there is now an MG nest facing the rest of my force and stopping all their movement. I have to make a full 60 second plan and then pay for my mistakes etc. I don't honestly know whether more players use RT vs WeGo. It seems a number of folks at BF play RT which I think undermines some of the expression of it as the stepchild, however not being an RTS player my position on that is probably poorly informed and skewed. Interesting though that you would feel WeGo is more the direct desendant to ASL. I would actually feel WeGo moves away from the ASL model again because in ASL as in RT, you can have your other units react immediately to what one unit discovers, in WeGo you can not. The net effect to me is it would seem WeGo forces you to slow down. Your action decision/cycle is based on 60 second intervals not an immediate RT feed. However that wasn't quite where I was going. (or maybe it was considering how vague I have been trying to formulate my subjective reactions to CMx2). I think there is something in the 1:1 representation that goes beyond the counter feel of CMx1. It isn't just that now individual soldiers react, spot and fire on targets separately. Somehow in doing so I am losing control over pieces of the battle and I have to take that into account when issuing orders. Prior I told a squad what to shoot at and the whole squad did so. Now that may not be the case. The TAC AI takes over a significant portion of what I used to have absolute control over. In a sense I feel like a squad commander. I tell the squad, "MG over there, suppressive fire!!!" In Cmx1 they did what they were told (assuming they weren't cowering etc). In CMx2 I feel like I get a range of reactions from "Yes Sarge, but I need to reload" to "where? I don't see nothin" and sometimes - "screw that there is a guy with an MP 50 feet away!!!" I think perhaps it is the loss of absolute control that has changed the game for me.

Figured I'd launch a discussion NOT about the upgrades, or MP lobby or the stupid friggin Vista patch. In another thread WriterJWA had noted I thought it an interesting topic (and not at all offensive). It actually got me thinking about how much of my gaming perspective for a tactical WW2 game is based originally on SL/ASL. The more I thought about that though I was wondering how much of that is still relevant. CMx1 was certainly for me almost a direct leap. Even the 3 stooges running around looked like the 3 man squad counters versus the 2 man team counters etc. It was a very easy visual transition. The options seemed more streamlined, but the game engine handled all those ridiculous calculations if i wanted to use some option like dash across a street. And I didn't have to figure out who in my 20 mile radius might be interested and not have some bizarre blog that would make me totally uncomfortable. I'd already had that experience dealing with deadheads. Moving to Cmx2 however feels to me like a different animal. It isn't just a visual thing, to me it feels (yes very subjective and totally vague, I know) very different. I also think I play the game different. I know the AS are still there but I do not play the game as if I am on a game board. (I do not use any grid mods, they ruin the immersion for me.) For years folks have discussed the transition to 1:1 and relative spotting and I have been playing CMSF for quite a while. Perhaps though in the return to WW2 I now have a more familiar environment to compare. I think the new engine has gone beyond the obvious and created a really subtle far reaching difference that fundamentally has shifted the game. I realize I am not being very concrete here which is why I figured to open the thread. Am I the only person who feels like there is a significant break in CMx2 with it's past legacy? I am talking about beyond the obvious stuff. Writer JMA I know you said these guys tend to just lurk around the forum, but I'd genuinely like to hear their perspective. I obviously have a very subjective sense about how I view the game and I do have a legacy going back to SL/ASL. Yet I also feel Cmx2 is moving beyond that. I don't think it is a question of MP lobbys and what not. I for one would welcome a multiplayer team game with FOW all the way around so you weren't sure even what the guy on your side was doing. Whether that is something BF prioritizes however is up to them. It's enough that they know there is interest. If they feel they can do it and it is appropriate given their other priorites cool. If not, I am still far too busy playing CM to worry about what it isn't.

Not a bad game, but really really hard to actually make time to play (much less learn the rules - heck learning C2 in Cm is a walk in the park compared to ASL) and not having a really good experience unless you are truly face to face. The problem as I see it with the "younger players" is they want it to look more like the rest of the stuff out there without trying to really understand why it doesn't. It isn't simply cause we are a bunch of old farts reminiscing on the good old days. (Our memories aren't that good). It has to do with the nature of what the game is trying to be and what it isn't. Unfortunately these folks are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Pound it as much as you want it just isn't going there. The "younger" players also seem to ignore BF's success at following their model and direction based on what they know about their base. In effect they are demanding BF move away from a successful business model to conform to what these guys normally play (or think they do anyway, they are amazingly blind to how the gaming world they function in really works) without realizing that in reality would likely mean BF's early demise. That accounts for some of the passion on this side. While I have no passion for or against the development by BF of an MP interface/lobby, I do have a passion regarding leaving BF to plan their business using the same good sense they have shown over 12 years now. I want BF to be around another 12 years and short sighted people demanding something they don't even fully understand or have statistical data on threatens that... in my humble opinion anyway.

Hmmm Lord of the Rings.... I waited years for the final episode (well worth waiting for, but I had to pay for the two additional episodes even though it was one story?! You believe that?) What if you don't like the ending, or the sandwich didn't have pickles, or your coffee was a little bitter. Fries? Extra content you'll need to pay for that. your right this was a bad analogy, CM is better than these You have an interesting perspective on time. Maybe once a year is constant? You must really be challenged about eating breakfast EVERYDAY. A Lot? Hmm you must still be learning to count. You see when counting, once you use up all your fingers, what do you do? No not use your toes silly. You see in our numbering system we eventually need to do something once we reach ten. We then add a column which we refer to as the "tens" column. See that now you begin to understand there are some truly big numbers out there, like 12. There are more columns, but baby steps you know. Fortunately to count the truly negative posts here your fingers would suffice. That is not a "lot" son.

And you can relax. The taint in the information we sense isn't coming from JonS and it has been evaluated on it's merit. For ex- from a post of yours earlier this evening about some disappearing Carrier group. Really? The Capt got a "letter of reprimand" for activating a super secret device in front of several Russian Intelligence ships. They get worse than that for running aground. Something is certainly tainted here.

I guess he is wondering who you think is doubting the importance of naval gunfire in Sicily. There has been enough stuff written that makes it pretty clear how important it was stopping the HG divison that it seems kind of blindingly obvious. Now Normandy, yeah there is doubt about the preliminary bombardment, but certainly the destroyer fire was a key factor in getting off Omaha beach. Your post did appear to be pointed directly at his comment that NGS was not in itself the sole determinant in the fighting in Anzio and Salerno. So you mis understood his post and proceeded to bombard him with what are really irrelevant links to one part of what he posted. Going from this to this and to end up ... wait? what the f**K, how did we get here? Note yes it is clear you can give plenty of examples. Problem is not one of them is actually relevant to his point. Why do you keep harassing him like this?

LOL I expect EVERYONE on this forum is wondering the same thing as you to some degree or another no matter how long they have been playing. Personally here are a few things I have found. Or at least I think I have found. Use cover as much as possible. Wheatfields are surprisingly good and ideal for ambushing armor. Hedgerows, walls, buildings - anything that will unquestionably block los you want between you and as much of your opponents force as possible when you are moving. spotting icons (the questionable sightings, not the hard ones) can be totally misleading. I have seen one unit create several icons and unless you are paying attention you don't realize it is showing you some characteristsics of that units speed of movement and direction and instead assume it is several units. I vary my movement based on situation Quick when I feel I have reasonable concealment Hunt when I want my guys to stop as soon as they sense something. Also typically use as I am approaching a position I want them to use as an OP Slow I use rarely. It will exhaust a unit rather quickly but is extremely useful in certain circumstances particularly if you are using a wall for cover. I have seen in AARs a couple people do this really well. I can only say once that I felt I used it very effectively, but a nice option in your toolkit. Smoke is your friend, also harassment artillery fire. If you can obscure the route you are sending a scout through or cause any potential opposition to keep their heads down you lower your opponents ability to spot. In answer to your specific questions there are a great many variables, probably too many to give a definitive answer. Quality of enemy troops, your troop quality, other activity going on (like can you drop a few mortar rounds on the area you suspect your opponent is at to suppress them a bit) will all affect enemy spotting. Are they even looking the correct direction? To be honest it is why I like CMBN so much. There is simply too much going on to expect a specific reaction to a given set of circumstances. I am like you, I love getting in to the minutiae of planning my movements. What did this guy hear, "Did you see that?" LOL I always wonder is all the chatter from my pixeltruppen heard by my opponent. Especially the guy yelling, let's get some noice discipline here! The best advice- go slow. Not the specific movement option, just in general. Your guys will spot better and be harder to spot. It is that simple. As someone else said on this forum, likely more than once -Don't feel the need to do something every turn. If you do you are probably moving too quick. It is okay to stay still a couple turns. Your troops will be better rested and spot better. I'll bet almost none of this is news to you, however I find in battle I need to repeat these to myself, it is too easy to forget in the rush of the moment.

Unneccesary, at least to me. Steve put it nicely replying to one post as passion. Agree/disagree - it's nice to have a place we can argue over a game/hobby we all obviously enjoy. Still good to let stuff drop. And it was one of the more wacky threads on here in quite some time. I can't speak to that. I don't feel passionately on that subject one way or the other. I figure if BF feels they have enough interest and enough resources they will head that way. I am of the opinion that I for one have NOTHING to offer BF in the way of business advice. Minetakeoshiru (I am sure I hacked that, but it is a Japanese expression - know your own height- in English, know your limits) I know BF has a much better view of what makes sense for their business than I ever hope to. Thank god, or we'd have never seen CMBB. No closing the thread was about us all going way out into left field. If all that had been on the general forum they'd have probably left it. It was simply inappropriate... hmm Hey Steve, can you move and re open it? I had a really stellar post I'd spent 20 minutes on and was hitting the button when you locked it. I am feeling deprived!

time honored. And I must warn you, that is the LEAST of the things that should worry you about this place.

Me too zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

sue me, you need the money

Soooo just being the loner makes you right? I thought Galileo stood against the mainstream because he had actual evidence that could be observed and proven, not some flakey conspiracy theory which seems to always be searching for that one bit of proof to somehow make whole cloth out of total fantasy. For example you have chosen to close ranks with your fellow conspiracy monger so let's revisit his latest. He has photos and videos he says of this supposed impounded alien vehicle guilty of improper parking (why would an Alien spaceship have to land in an airport? I mean geez, after crossing the galaxy they need someone to provide a bridgeway to leave their spacecraft? I mean really if you are gonna make this s**t up, at least put some effort into it! Lazy good for nothing conspiracy theory pulp writers. No wonder you can't make any money.) Sorry, back to the post - so why the f**k didn't he include a link to the pic? I mean really "Visit my blog" Are you kidding me? C'mere little boy, would you like some candy. Makes my skin crawl. I've seen you tossing your's out there, 911 and I'm still waiting for the big one, c'mon you know you want to say it....ooohh so close....

uh oh that again..... not quite sure how that is germaine. CMSF is surely not 2 versions back and it is not getting upgraded. CMBO was only 1 version behind CMBB but it never got upgraded. The policy is new based on the work BFC has been doing with CMx2. CMSF is just too far different to make it possible, it would mean redoing the entire game. The line is drawn at CMBN and thankfully does include that. BF could simply have said, "starting with version 2 and going forward, we are not doing CMBN as it would require a major rework of all the components". Instead they are including CMBN for a measly $10! Christ the fools, I'd have paid a LOT more for that - their business model is fundamentally flawed!! This whole red herring issue about the vista patch has been explained ad nauseum. Is it really THAT hard to understand why it had what it had and why it didn't have what it didn't have for $5? C'mon KR I know you are smarter than that. Did you really read BF's announcement to imply it would apply to a product that old? Is it really that much of a stretch to understand why BF chose the approach they did and can't we just appreciate all the really cool aspects of what they just announced?

Here's the thing I love, when it comes down to it who really has the closed mind? Was it Galileo for believeing only what he could observe and prove or the Papacy for believeing in what one had to have faith to believe. Oh yeah and umm, who was actually right?

You know I started wondering why the Aliens just don't land and announce themselves. Surely with technology so advanced over ours they could easily handle our petty security forces and make sure they get their presence known. Then I started thinking about WHERE they would land and I began to think, maybe JK and co. are on to something.. No wait a minute now, think about this. San Francisco - We'd all think we were having a flashback, mutter oh cool, then go sit watching the colored lights. LA- they'd simply get stuck in traffic and at best make a traffic report about congestion on the I5 NY- They'd be up on cinder blocks and stripped in 20 minutes Wash DC - yeah who'd believe anything that happens there? Miami - You'd just have a mass die off from heart attacks at some retirement community and there'd be no one left to report their landing. Texas (and probably anywhere south of the border) mmm gator... Heck I've eaten Gator in Texas Louisiana. hmm they might make a special episode of swamp people.. Other countries? London - no way in hell the Olympic committee would allow them to park Paris - forget it unless they speak French, the French wouldn't want any alien words polluting their language. Spain, Italy , Greece - they'd try to steal it, pawn it and pay off their national debt Germany- they'd try to steal it pawn it and pay off Greece's debt Russia - only if they are willing to be filmed wrestling Putin, and they have to agree to lose. Middle East - the appearance of anything that isn't belonging obviously to anyone would just kick off the real shooting war India if they are too close to the Pakistani border same problem, if they land elsewhere and discover they can offshore all their IT support we may never hear from them at all China- they'll steal it and make copies. Australia - Reptile , Crocodile Dundee - need I say more Japan - The reptoid word for "greetings earthingly" probably sounds like Godzilla N Korea - hmm maybe they HAVE landed So maybe the aliens are simply scratching their heads trying to figure out where on this godforsaken planet can they even land?

there fixed that for ya!

+1 on the idea and I agree. I'd be amazed if any designer planned on your C2 connections, hell most of us can't figure out when we are impacting them. I'd love being able to task orient my force and know the C2 comms are still applicable.

I think they will actually do it while hiding, though I think it may depend on the quality of the troops as to how quickly they will get about it. Cowering definitely not. I have had a couple guys trying to retrieve a Pshk for a bit and everytime they receive fire they cower and then have to start all over.