jomni

Everyone has their preferences... Case closed. I prefer a modern version of Close Combat. Close Combat Marines will go commercial this year via Matirx. I think BF has a policy on posting other games in this forums...

But isn't this logical? Hunt means walk cautiously until you see the enemy. When you see the enemy run for cover and take firing positions. This is probably an AI self-preservation logic. I'd rather have this than your infantry shooting all-out and exposing themselves, or something doing the crawl of death.

...especially when they're under fire and doing the crawl of death.

#2 and #3 this happens when the AI surrenders or you call a ceasefire... it seems to be a game bug. not related to editor.

It's very easy to create 4km x 4km open desert maps to stage tank vs. tank fights. I did one but got bored (no satisfaction).

Use Assault where half of your team shoots and the other attacks. Although the attacker will get butchered eventually when they go in the house unless you suppress the defenders heavily.

TacAI is somewhat broken. Currently the sure way for them to fire back is if you give the target orders or cover arc. Hopefully this is fixed in 1.03

I read the manual and my initial notion is as explained. So I find nothing wrong with the manual.

Yup. Manual says when you compile all missions into a campaign, they are all molded into one file.. which you can't edit I suppose.

Buy the commercial version of Close Combat Marines (released late this year) if you really want Marines. Anyway, I think the next thing they're cooking is WW2.

AI "Crawl of Death"... Looks like Close Combat all over again.

I'm using an obsolete ATI card that is not supported and it works. Sorry to make you feel bad.

You can just copy all scenario files and dump it in the QB folder. But you have to make sure that you have plans for both sides. You may also need to edit the objectives as all objectives become capture objectives in QB. I stopped doing this as I found out that QB troop selection is annoyingly unbalanced at times. Until they fix this, I'm not playing QB.

No problem with Arty accuracy. Maybe you're using your normal squads to call the missions? HQ's and spotters are best.

I lost that battle as well.

1) I have yet to see this but most probably a bug. 2) Definitely a bug.

Based on your preferences... NO! This game is not like the previous titles so you have to "unlearn" and release your attachment from anything CMx1. But if you keep an open mind then maybe it might just work.

found it

Stop complaining the same things all over again. 1.02 did not promise a TacAI fix. Although BF mentioned that 1.03 will fix the TacAI and LOS bugs. So if 1.03 does not work out then start complaining again!

Yes

where's the download link?

That's why Battlefront said to wait for 1.03... which has some pathfinding and TacAI fixes.

hmmm... sounds juicy.

We're getting a lot of user-made scenario's already that are sometimes better than the stock missions. In CMSF, we set a strategy for the AI. This tells the AI how to move along the map, which groups, and what are their SOP's (quick, assault, advance, etc). It's scripted in a sense but not scripted to the last detail. (More freedom for the AI). But we do have some problems with Tactical AI in the game (e.g. pathfinding problems and standing in front of enemy fire). There is great replay value in the game, if you ever get past the bugs. You can even edit the stock missions if you find the AI plan faulty (like what I did). You can play any side. You can set several (5?) general AI plans for each side and the AI will just randomly pick up one before the start of the battle. Nope, you can also set up a US vs US fight.

I never bothered to buy CMAK because I thought CMBO is already enough and loads of fun. I think Steve is thinking about people like me who needs something fresh.