LukeFF

Yes, that's me.

So, what does all of this crap have to do with CM, anyways?

Well, then as we would say in the Army, quit yer' bitchin, and be a bit more appreciative of what the scenario designers do put out. Or, like I said, learn the scenario editor and start making some scenarios that use all these vehicles you claim aren't being used.

The mission editor is always there for you to use and fill in this perceived gap you see.

There is none. It's just Kettler as usual wanting to draw attention to himself.

edit: N/M

kB? C'mon, join the rest of us in the 21st century. Try it and see - other sites typically allow up to 10MB.

Create screenshot, click on screenshot file icon, drag to reply window here. Not exactly difficult.

Umm...no. It was tested in beta and found that it didn't work very well. That's very old news by now.

That's B.S., Erwin. The maps in CM2 are just as large or even larger than what is available in CM1 - a horribly old, outdated, inefficient game engine.

As the story goes, that's because Hitler had forbade the development of any new rifles, so the weapon was called an MP to hide its true nature. In reality, it always was what it would eventually become - an assault rifle.

No doubt about that. The SVT-40's predecessor - the SVT-38 - had a bunch of issues, including the very worrying tendency to have the magazine fall out(!) The SVT-40 was definitely an improvement, and had the war with Germany had not intervened, more of the nagging bugs would probably have been worked out (such as the accuracy issue). LOL yes, the AVT-40 was a crazy idea. A lot of SVT-40's rebuilt after the war ended up with an AVT stock, which can be noticed by the cutout on both sides of the stock for the safety switch.

It's a decent rifle, but I wouldn't call it excellent. It has a finicky gas valve that has to be set just right with a wrench (i.e., something easy to lose), or else it becomes a very fancy bolt-action rifle. It also never sufficed as a sniper rifle, and so the many sniper scopes built for it were re-calibrated for the M91/30. That said, if you have nothing else (e.g., Finland, Germany), it's a decent design. I have a 1940 model built by Tula that I take out to the range a few times a year. It's a PITA to clean, though.

Magazine

You can add Red Orchestra (only played the Ostfront one) to that list as well.

Because they also exist in Red Thunder.

Great video! I spent many a drill weekend at Irwin while I was with the 1-185 AR.

Well, what's wrong with that? The point of a forum is to well, discuss the game. If people are asking more questions, that means they are interested in what's being developed. That's how good rapport is developed.

Oh come on, quit making excuses like this. It's crazy. Go look at what 1CGS does with a small team and a limited budget for the IL2 Great Battles series - an extremely complex, 3D game based on their own unique proprietary engine. They are able to publish weekly updates very consistently and, if one isn't forthcoming, someone from 1CGS will post that a development isn't coming that particular week. It's become such a tradition that there's a very active topic where people discuss what they think is coming in that week's update. Again, that's from a team with a very limited budget and where every dollar and development hour has to be properly accounted for. This isn't EA or Ubisoft we are talking about here.

Why don't you Google it yourself and see? Good lord, it's not hard at all.

Please. Have you done any reading on the Soviet sniper doctrine during the war? They were doing a hell of a lot more than just being assassins.

Steve, as someone who knows the above-mentioned Jason Williams as a personal friend (heck, we went to each other's weddings), I can assure you that game development is his full time job. You know I love the work and the games you develop, but I'm one of those that believes your frequency/methods of communicating updates with the community could be a lot better.

Your preview images are way, way too small.

You don't really play any other games, do you? Good-looking shadows aren't some million dollar budget item out of reach of small developers like Battlefront. Good grief, the logic and reasoning of people like you sometimes.

See, this is the sort of thing that holds back meaningful development - people that are happy with early 2000s-era graphics detail. Saying shadows aren't necessary in this day and age of computer gaming and graphics power is absolutely bizarre and crazy.