TuuSaR

Well that was sort of rookie adventure.... :eek: I just got bit worried about reinforcement, I pray that they are not some dynamic balance feature to help either side.(to keep game going longer time) Because I would deeply hate to demolish enemy, get no reinforcement and see enemy getting masses of help. That would not be very rewarding. But maybe I'm just paranoid. I remember old soviet propaganda movie where tanks were rolling and planes fly maximum low overhead.

If they are same group it would make things very interesting as there are AA units in the game. [ August 05, 2006, 04:29 AM: Message edited by: TuuSaR ]

Its all about money, if their game sells very well, they can add and improve hugely just by patching. Because sales are unknown, all future is unknown. You can ask them to improve game but forecasting future is overboard.

But people like you are rare, extremely rare. There is no business sense to make certain micro details that public wont never ever notice. Game looks good at the moment from my non-insider view point and most likely will be fantastic once money starts to make effect.

Yeah future looks very good indeed when money starts to flow game concept can be improved never ending. Like in Total War series. What comes to passengers I wonder are soldiers heads below side edge of APC? So that they would be prodected totally against small arms fire.

Black market Vodga is only explanation I think of.

I'm quite sure that those enemy AT's are not so major pain as this AAR let to imagen. Thing was that in this AAR player tried to do many things at the same time, when in general against AI should always move very very slowly, taking one enemy unit at a time.(unless there is hurry to some tactical better position, like hill etc..) And yes M Hofbauer, I should have added "always" somewhere between in that last sentence But to consider something like 6 units of 82mm or 120mm mortars focusing one target that very often is totally without physical cover can cause quite some damage. Of course is ridiculous to ponder these sort of things at the moment when we have no idea how it actually WOULD BE in the game. [ August 03, 2006, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: TuuSaR ]

Having mortar units would un-balance every single mission that they would have design and test all over again! Its impossible to have them in initial release as far I guess.(apart from maybe multiplay) With mortars player could destroy with pinpoint accuracy many enemy units with little or no danger at all. Not even needing LOS. Polls would be good on many things, especially after demo, so that developers would know, should they focus to some historical uniform correctness or maybe something more relevant. With these sort of games devs might often go off course, focusing details that masses wont event notice. [ August 03, 2006, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: TuuSaR ]

I got feeling that it was played out with not so maximum effort to give more interesting storyline. Making mission more "real world" but also somewhat disaster. Unless there was a time deadline causing hurry, that is often used in many games to compansate A.I vs superhuman unbalance. Now we just that new video trailer btw, where those reinforces time or area trigged?

After battle is over, is all undamaged enemy material automatically picked or is more like jagged alliance style, everything has to be picked up before ending the mission?

How much points/units does player usually have available? Is roster easily full or is cautious needed? Do you need to save often like in cc2? Is unit capturing a must? Is there extreme points balancing feature,(like in cc3 campaign multiplay), if player is too good? How easily player builds full superduber army? (sorry if asked before, make FAQ or something)

In Finland we have saying that beloved child has many names.

I'm quite tempted to hit gamma settings high if visibility is too dark. So dusk is enough for me.

I'm also big big fan of CC3 and that's why I'm waiting this game. But but, thing is that these guys are doing their OWN game, not converting CC to 3D. So with expectations, ice on hat I would say.

Or something called military achievement

Involving air things, I hope that I can order all units to fire enemy airplanes, not just normal AA. Especially now when I have seen pics of very low flying sturmovik. Also in that pic, infantry didnt "duck and cover".

Maybe there should be limited amount of pauses per player? But there are other reasons for pause also(other than gaming), urgent things might happen in real life. One time guy had to leave because wife had to give a birth, but I guess that was in FPS game

I thought that because its based on IL2, I dont have to update my 2gig AMD and Nvidia 4600, but it seems that my hopes were over estimated, unless removing AA and using more modest resolution can make a difference.

Modding/editing crowd is usually noisiest but that doesnt make them biggest in any game I know of.

Thanks for quick reply. Close combat 3 map system would be fun for multiplay.

Release as game version or release as later addon?

At least in close combat 3 against human opponent main use of buildings was LOS blockade. Because there wasnt much sense putting guys inside, especially in first row of buildings, because opponent shot them all to make sure. I like very much house&tank chess game. What sort of firing lines do you plan and how do you solve them. oh goodie But of course, it would be lot of fun to smash houses with soldiers inside. But if I have to choose I rather take tank based game. (sorry if off-topic)

Are missions just linked in continuum or does winning matter in any other way than collecting game points? Can player influence outcome(or next battle) or is war lost or won strictly based on history? And yes I think I know the answer already but I just have to ask because its always bit funny that company X says "we make best game ever!!!" and in next sentence "well we are small company, lacking money and personal, sorry cant do" So no hard feelings, going to buy it regardless