Sgt.Squarehead

Bang for your buck-wise.....It's the best investment you could make:


 

Keeping his Pattons locked in the closet, eh? 

Me too. 
Fekkin Microsoft need nuking. 

Me too. 
Fekkin Microsoft need nuking. 

Me too. 
Fekkin Microsoft need nuking. 

Interesting article with commentary from an American who has actually flown one, apparently he rather disagrees with the forum's 'arm-chair air-vice-marshals' on a number of points: 

In the four years that the MiG-23ML has been in his charge, Ward says he has not come across any pilot or maintainer that didn’t “absolutely just love this airplane.”
In contrast to Western fighters of the same period, which mainly relied upon more efficient turbofans, the Soviets chose to retain a turbojet. However, Ward judges it was “probably one of the best turbojets ever made,” and “magnificently reliable.”
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39824/this-myth-busting-walk-around-of-the-soviet-mig-23-flogger-fighter-is-a-must-watch
 

Semmes
I think everyone that plays the game has opinions on ways that the game could be better.
And I do beleive the guys that work on the game and the company itself is constantly working on ways and want to make the game as realistic as possible. It is a part of the goals they have in general.
But they can only do so much, they already have list of many items they would like to see. That list is full of items placed from high priority to low. 
Some times, items on the list cannot be addressed. The programming in the game engine is just not there to do it.
Sometimes its not addressed because the amount of programming for what is gained in the game is just not worth the amount of effort needed to make it happen.
So one needs to understand that only those people doing the work will be the ones that will decide how and what the game will ever be. So we need to keep that in mind.
What we as users can do, is try to make suggestions with logical data or historic facts as to items that might be improvements in the future.
But so many players get upset when they dont see the items they would like to be improved happen after doing nothing more than making the request here on their site.
But I wanted to just let you know that, yes, some of your issues have good points and yes they could be done better and no the game does not have it right presently. but what level each issue has to how the game plays and where it fits in the endless list of possible improvements for the future. Only the designers of the game know and its out of our hands. And no one that has commented in this thread has the power or understanding as to if it matters to the designer.
Some of us Beta testers do know what they are focused on improving for the near future and that is about it and we get to make suggestions and such to those efforts, and what we read on the forum helps us remember things that could be improved but it still comes down to the people writting the code and making it actually happen. And being people, there is limits as to what they can do.
But I personnaly respect the BF team and all the hard work they have done and what the game is and what they have adcheived. Others do also. That does not mean anyone thinks the game is the greatest thing ever and that its perfect or that it cannot be improved. What it means is that they have done something no one else has done and so yes, they are the best option that is presently available, but if someone else could do a better job and make a better product. I am sure the loyal following would drift away onto those better things. But for the time being, I think they need not worry, because there is nothing out there pulling people away because it does a better realistic job, that is for sure.
 
So in that sence, yes there is a attitude as to the game being Great because what else has adcheived the same.

Stuff like that seems like a perfect fit ! I second this request...😊
Adding some partisans to Normandy would also be nice...

Shhhh.....Be careful or the Yanks will elect it! 

Keeping his Pattons locked in the closet, eh? 

Title says it all really.....An appeal to @Battlefront.com to add Uncon abilities to the Partisans in CM:RT. 
As they currently stand they are just rubbish infantry (with no access to vehicles), I'm assuming that, as the game lacks a Population Density setting, they can't infiltrate urban areas any better than other units (although I haven't properly tested this, yet) and they definitely can't blow up a bridge or lay booby-traps (other than mines, which are a poor substitute for IEDs). 

Some are not even birds:

Or by 1981:

"Are you picking on our little brother?" 

Keeping his Pattons locked in the closet, eh? 

Title says it all really.....An appeal to @Battlefront.com to add Uncon abilities to the Partisans in CM:RT. 
As they currently stand they are just rubbish infantry (with no access to vehicles), I'm assuming that, as the game lacks a Population Density setting, they can't infiltrate urban areas any better than other units (although I haven't properly tested this, yet) and they definitely can't blow up a bridge or lay booby-traps (other than mines, which are a poor substitute for IEDs). 

They've all been added back as of a few minutes ago. 
 

I think he's actually modern-curious but doesn't want to admit it.  Probably worried he won't like shermans anymore once he gets hold of an Abrams.

No need for Battlefront to do that.....There are already settings in the editor for limited supply options.

@Warts 'n' all if you seriously:
Why are you in a thread exclusively advertising them? 
It's not like there's going to be any WWII materiel in here, is it? 
 
 

I modified some floating icons so that the HMG34 modded to be a maxim now has floating icon for maxim.
Also the Sotka has floating icon for T34 shaped tank. modtagged [finn] and now in the goody box

I used an alpha layer and made them transparent

I'll let you know when I finish it.....I'm Having fun with the map:

Still a long way to go, but I reckon it's starting to take shape.....Won't look much like that in game mind you, the conditions are set to make my life easy while making it, but they'll be set to do the opposite for the player! 

@Sgt.Squarehead, the modern titles would blow their limited 1640's minds.  They have problems coping with WWII ferocity.  Can you imagine them getting hit with precision cluster bombs (CBU-97)?  They would run away with soiled breeches.
 

I'd bestow that honour on CM:BS personally, but otherwise I am in agreement with your comments, particularly the excellence of the Soviet training missions.....I really enjoyed them and they felt about as Soviet as it gets. 
PS - @The_Capt  IIRC one of the Soviet training missions features an objective that is portrayed in the briefing as being an exit.....However it's not an actual Exit Zone, which means if your units take it by 'Coup De Main' they wind up sitting there getting shot to pieces by the defenders, rather than exiting as they should.
A lot of fuss gets made about using Exit Zones, because they complicate VP allocations, but it is my opinion that they should be used when the scenario calls for it.
 

Nope! 
Newer new, new things are needed.....Now! 

You want it to look more like this one ...
This is actually one of the earliest Tigers captured by the Russians, turret number 121, serial number 250004 from 502nd battalion captured January 1943. Very informative article about this poor wreck and it's sister 100 #250009 here with lots of juicy pepperpot pics.