sburke

You'll be getting a visit from a couple suits today to warn you against making any unwarranted suggestions about possible surveillance of your gaming habits. One of the suits will just be a brain in a jar. You will be warned against mentioning that.

LOL Gamey PRC!!! Gamey is whatever 2 players agree what it is. Broadsword and I play with no real concern about victory points per se. We play with the perspective of our commanders intent and some calculations about the effectiveness of a unit after it has suffered x amount of losses that conform to the op layer of our campaign. So there is nothing to "rush" in the last minute of the game. Actually most of our games end up with one side or the other conceding once we know we have crossed a particular threshold where the outcome for the op layer is already known. The other opponents I have played aren't based on an op layer, but game play tends to be similar. The scenario VL are generally the commanders intent. I can't 100% vouch for my opponents, but I don't think they or I really get wrapped up in the VL and points so much as try to enjoy a battle. The VLs define the flow of the battle and commanders intent. After that the objective is simple - destroy the enemy Now some scenarios (Shadow of the Hill 5am for ex) define a secure area as objectives. I don't view it as gamey for my opponent to sneak a unit on there. The whole point is I have to secure the area. Stay behind snipers etc are exactly what I am supposed to make sure aren't around. For those that are playing competitively (ladders and such) I'd expect a much more stringent definition of conduct.

Not sure I get the question. I assumed (apparently incorrectly ) that this was for the player's sake. The AI has apparently some "memory" for continuing to shoot at a location once it no longer spots a unit it had been firing upon, but memory of where it spotted a target once it goes back to the vehicle and remounts? Come on guys the AI is not Data from Star Trek It is a simple statement of continuing firing upon x for y amount of time after losing sight of x (with perhaps a caveat of shoot something else if you see it). It doesn't actually remember anything. Besides, in the amount of time it took to remount, the situation may have totally changed. - They saw a PSW 222 and ran back to their tank (giggling uncontrollably about the easy kill they were gonna have) and while they were running a King Tiger pulled up...oops.

beautiful! Yeah it looks like he bounced it right off the tree trunk. Lucky thing you didn't have a team moving up to join them. They'd likely have been a bit pissed. LOL

Actually you can dismount the crew if you want. I wouldn't cause mine would end up strolling into a minefield. It isn't quite like dismounting just the TC, but if you are looking to have them hop out and take a quick discreet peek with hopefully a chance to not be observed it is an option.

I totally get that and it isn't about bright etc. Once you buy the game, it is yours to play however you want. Whether BF considers trying to implement something that stops the timer and allows the game to continue is up to them. If there was enough demand they'd probably consider it. Not sure how they would implement it as the AI is directly tied to the timer, but that is a programming thing of which I know zip. I still think it will end up being an unsatisfactory experience simply because you have now effectively dumbed down the AI. It no longer has any orders so you are playing against a static situation or worse. Noooooooooooooo WeGo is absoultely the best part of CM. Okay in my poor humble opinion anyway. I can't stand real time and if you are really into the narrative of the game, the only way to appreciate the million and one things that are going on in most battles is review. It also breaks you from being able to minutely control everything every second. You basically have 60 seconds to live with the conesquences of your decisions. For me, a high point of the game.

I picked up Lions of Carentan, but I can't say I really recommend it. It didn't turn out to be quite what the title implied. Very little on the battle for Carentan. There is a bit more info on the unit's experience in Holland and some on Italy, but overall the book is pretty thin on detail.

Much as I really love his work, the mods are secondary to all the feature enhancements and fixes that should come with version 2, much less the additional Modules etc. I have modded the hell out of my copy and I suspect I will have to dump a lot of them and that'll be a little bit of a bummer for awhile, but modders are what they are and I am sure I will see the ones I do lose getting replaced over time. If you really do want to retain them you can always load a second copy of CMBN on your PC and upgrade that copy - get the best of both as it were. I suspect Aris will be looking to mod version 2 as well especially if the new models allow for things unable to be done in version 1.10, but only Aris can speak to that. Also as BFC is having to redo all the models anyway they may surprise us in how good they turn out. The CMFI vehicles certainly look pretty good.

You mean CM:American Factory has been announced?!!

Smarter than the average bear!!! Hey Boo Boo?! As everyone else has noted, depends on what AI you are talking about. Individual units have their own survival TAC AI, but the fact that one unit has spotted your unit is completely irrelevant to any other unit that has not done so. They will follow their own AI plans the designers has programmed until they specifically have a reason to not want to, like being dead. Orders are orders.

LOL yeah can you have it only happen to my opponents? Actually I am in the camp of it having a more serious impact. Defining what "more serious" means and finding that illusory happy middle ground is the tricky part.

And a scenario that can anticipate a human's actions and create a credible defensive action (much less those that simply have occasional unit movement to create the feel of an active opponent) is truly an art to appreciate. Besides part of the tension of the game is to know you are going to have to take some risks. The issue then becomes how to lessen the risk by using better tactics, not simply by taking more time (however going slow is definitely a must). @George MC - we need SOMETHING to kill time waiting for CMFI while at work...

Perhaps we need to define artificial. The allotted game time plays a couple functions. One is to help you understand the AI plan is only going to handle a set period of time. You can edit a scenario to change that, but now you have effectively hamstrung the AI. secondly it forces you to act. This is the only way to give the AI a chance. Once you have overrun the timer, you now have complete liberty to act knowing the AI has no further plans. third - WW2 commanders (actually commanders in any era) rarely had the luxury of deciding when to act. They were given objectives and a time to meet those objectives. For some reason gamers seem to think a low level military commander gets to decide to take all the time they want to meet an objective. THAT is unrealistic. Even higher level commanders have timed objectives - closing a pocket on enemy troops for example doesn't work real well if one pincer takes it's good sweet time about doing so. On the other hand deciding how long it should take to achieve X is a really really difficult proposition for a scenario designer. Is the audience playing RT vs WeGO, are they a cautious player, are they expereinced.. there are so many variables that affect how the AI plan will interact with a player's decisons to make a challenging, realistic and fun scenario that it is frankly very intimidating to create them. I know it has scared me off so far as the user response is all over the map and no one seems to appreciate that their opinion is completely counter to others.

This is essentially what the Gamers did in the TCS series of games. You had to draw up Op plans. The suggestion was even to demarc unit boundaries and they gave typical front coverage for platoons/companies to give you guidance. To alter your op plan you had several factors involved. Had the unit been fired upon, is it BN size (the assumption being they'd have larger staffs to assist with planning) how much time had elapsed since development of the op plan etc. You then rolled a die to see if you could actually implement the plan. Until you were succesful you had to adhere to the plan.

I just tried iron mode for the 1st time and found this as well. It takes some getting used to the difference, but I found this really helpful at understanding a units isolation and potential issues for C2 etc. Gives an interesting change of perspective. I don't know that I would recommend it for an RTS player, but as a WeGo player I appreciate the very graphic view of the units overall awareness.

Down in front!!! Back to the AAR!! Damn I hate popcorn.

really nice shots, waiting to see him stick that trench sweeper over the wall and take out the opposition.

LOL look out man the anti tank rocking bde is gonna be burning you in effigy next.

half casualties, half not. Problem solved

As I was recently shown in a PBEM, there are a lot of ways to create a reverse slope. To be given one is just too good an opportunity to pass up.

Unquestionably true, however the potential to be modded to give a more immersive feel to a scenario or campaign is unique and therefore it becomes the most immersive per pixel for those of us that like that sort of thing. I loved seeing that emblem for the 352nd ID while playing Hamel Vallee. The portraits have become one of my favorite mods. Granted a lot of people I am sure could care less, but we could say that about every item, option, or text in the UI to some degree or another. This message brought to you by Keep the Portrait - a non profit organization dedicated to keeping the portrait section of the CMx2 UI. Keep the Portrait is in no way affililiated to BFC or any of it's off shore holding companies Steve - not of Battlefront

IME doubleclicking any HQ brings up all units of that formation regardless of C2 state. Also useful for issuing a formation move order particularly movement that is not exposed to enemy fire.

LOL yeah I know, that was kind of the joke. The folks making the statement seem unaware medicare is gov't medical. Just one more thing for you Canadians to chuckle about us dumb a** Mericans. Well don't get too giggly- you guys only had 2 teams in the Stanley cup and both got eliminated first round (we'll conveniently ignore how many players in US NHL teams are Canadian - thank you very much)

Some of us find the portrait one of the most immersive items, with Mord/DCs mod even more so. Should we start a petiton drive for keeping BF hands off our portraits? (kind of premised on keeping your gov't hands off my medicare).

Generally I get your point, but one question relative to this that I think may be why many of us do not notice this quite so much. Tree height is based on the specific AS it is positioned on. If you have a bunch of trees (or bushes) across a certain amount of distance, the undulations in terrain are going to alter the "height" of trees (and bushes) relative to one another. The only circumstance where the foilage/brush additions you are proposing would seem to have a major impact is in flat terrain (maybe not flat as in 0 degree slope, but a consistent slope with no undulations). Is that a fair assumption or am I wandering around out in left field again?