[hirr]Leto

My CMAK has a hiccup yesterday, and it seemed to move from 1600 all the way down to a lower setting, infecting the rest of my screen resolution out of the game in the same way requiring a reboot. When I fired up CMAK again, it was still in the low screen resolution, a complete waste of my 24 inch monitor. Is there any way to reset the game to a higher screen resolution without reinstalling it now? Cheers! Leto

Ooorah EH! : ) Leto

Good article! Thanks! Our boys make us Canucks very proud! Cheers! Leto

BTW, my rant was not directed specifically at anyone, but some may have inferred that it was referencing the guy chewed with the diamond case DVD. There are a long line of forum personalities, both existing and deceased (banned) that I address my comments to in general. Steve has pointed out on several occasions, as well as others here on these boards, that the way things are run around here really aren't that bad and actually quite good in relative terms... my point being, that if you feel otherwise, please do look at some of these other examples of wild west forums and their Forum Administrators (that range from completely psychotic, to extremely damaged and insecure control freaks to those who I think are even worse: those who pretend to be fair but are otherwise very agenda oriented). My other point being, and I have to reinforce this again: you are out of your mind if you think negative criticism, and especially off base or doom saying criticism isn't going to be jumped on and made into a nice Bougolais by the majority of people here that are part of a community working to better the game. While most people enjoy a bit of debate, some teasing and taunting and especially a few good arguments (me most of all I think), the approach you use is perhaps potentially more damning than the negative content you espouse. And to show that these things are all a natural part of the message board world, I have to provide you with this really interesting website: http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/ See if you can't find yourself in these classifications... I think they are absolutely hilarious, and I believe I have probably known at least one of each in my time (and been a few as well). Cheers! Leto

I think one needs to ask himself this question before he posts on these boards: "am I going to bitch, whine, complain, or ask leading questions to which a negative response will certainly be garnered?" If the answer is yes, and you are still serious about making a negative comment, complaint or provide critical feedback, and you qualify yourself as a serious adult, then perhaps you may want to email the company representative instead of posting? Look, no matter what anybody wishes to believe, these message boards are the property of BFC: it is not a democracy. Comments on whether Steve, Moon or anyone else is fudgint the system or making administrative decisions that you do not agree with is simply infantile rubbish: they have every right to do anything they want. Furthermore, while you may believe as a gamer that you are entitled to a pound of flesh just because you bought one of their games, please realize that this is how they make their living: it's real live flesh and it hurts when it is savaged from the body. Do you think they want your negative crap thrust upon them and their community time and time again? Be happy that even the slightest semblance of friction presented here does not lead to outright bans. For some of the posts I've seen, I would support BFC guys going to your house and beating you with a pipe. Ergo, these boards support critical functions of advertising, marketing, messaging, interaction between members of a community that enjoys the game and is working on finding ways of making it better. If you think BFC is clamping down on negativity, unconstructive feedback, or plain irritating posters, then guess what: put in their place you would probably do the same, and tough noogies to you if you think you are above such a statement of logical role reversal: I doubt anyone with a company being on the line, and whether or not you can buy your daughter a pony rests upon ensuring positive messaging of your products and your company. Do you think the people on these boards are overly biased fanbois who jump on everyone who makes a negative comment? Well Jeez, Louise, guess what? There is a community of players that actually LIKE the game and if you don't like the game, and you want to post about it, then realize you will PROBABLY get push back. Now, while many of these people are admitted suckups and apocryphillic figureheads of BFC, wanting nothing but to spit venom upon non believer pagan troglodytes, the majority of them simply play the game, contribute to the game design, and have a little bit of investment in the company and the games they play. They are a community of like minds, not unlike a beehive (Yes, Steve, I am calling you a "Queen" and the rest "drones"... LMAO!! If anyone infers you wearing high heels and lipstick, it is simply their own wasteland of a mind at work... wait a sec... hmmm... scratch that last part... I guess that was my wasteland of a mind at work). So DON'T get all fretty when they tell you off. You probably deserve it. Needless to say, but necessary all the more, these things should all be SELF EVIDENT. I am constantly amused by the sentiments posted here about how the world should work, and am constantly entertained by the people who live in worlds with purple skies interpret the actions of BFC and their legion of guard dogs (Reminds me a bit of Monty burns: "release the hounds"... lol) on these boards against metrics that simply do not have any substantial relevance here. The guys who played CMx1 and do not care for CMx2 have mostly left these boards (in the hundreds and I stand by this as a fact being part of that very large community) and do not regard it as having any serious content of interest to them anymore. Perhaps this should be taken as an example of your own pathway if you have such critically absurd and Mansonian attitudes toward what the new games look and play like, how they are marketed, and the philosophy of BFC with regards to their business model. If BFC has replaced those hundreds with thousands as they would have you believe, is irrelevant: if you do not like the game, do not buy the game, do not condemn the game, and just go find a game that you like. In conclusion: think before you post, and realize that your views are most likely going to be in the minority and not well recieved if they are beligerently composed toward any aspect of the game... even inane ones. BTW, I am not a pro BFC guy, still play CM1 more than CM2, and have no interest in this but to inject myself in where I see the obvious being patently ignored time and time again, and the actions of BFC constantly questioned, if only as an oppositely biased voice of reason. Cheers! Leto

I always find it oddly fascinating every time someone reverts to using the word "gamey" when one is talking about a game. Meeting engagments may not be very historical or realistic, but they are a lot of fun... because its a GAME. The dogmatic philosophies that surface in the wargaming world in both their multiplicity and diversity still astound me. Cheers! Leto

Now what the heck is that supposed to mean? : ) Cheers! Leto

I don't know if it already is built into CMSF, since I've only got the main game so far, but how about use of captured equipment? Also, is there a current ability for the game engine to tow or bump immobilized vehicles out of harms way or into better LOS for continued usage of the vehicle? Also, according to the academic literature on South Park, individuals crap their pants when they die in a most humourous manner. Would it be possible to get it to this level of realism with our poop filled pixel truppen? Lastly, I would love to see female soldiers... just leave the rest to the pervert modders out there... (you know who you are... especially the guy who replaced cannons with large male genitalia...) Cheers! Leto * Now we can play Sesame Street's "one of these things are not like the other" and you guys can try to figure out which one of these requests is not real.

Band of Brothers (a club I belong to) does not really play a lot of CMSF. They still play on the whole CMAK, CMBB and CMBO and all the AARs and DARs there are CMx1 based. All other CM clubs that I know of outside of World at War, do not play CMSF. World at War has a few guys that try to put together tournaments, but due to the nature of the CMSF game, it is not congruent to competitive PBEM tourney play, so there are not a lot of people that play the game this way. I wrote DARs for a very long time and find that the work that goes into it, usually is not appreciated by the lurkers, who for some reason, do not even attempt to get involved in the DAR, throw in an atta boy! or even leave a thanks for writing them. I was going to begin writing DARs in CMSF to explain the nuances of CMSF in comparison and contrast to CMx1, but due to the great apathy, and my utter lack of talent for writing witty, urban and educational DARs, I have given up on that quest for fire. I am back playing CMAK again and have not played CMSF for awhile now... maybe I am lazy with the learning curve of CMSF, or maybe I just cannot get into the game yet... dunno. I think the whole collective wargaming community is now waiting for CM Normandy... and in the meantime, is back playing CMx1 (and I am sure there is a whole other community out there playing and loving CMSF... so CMSF luvahs please do not rip out my heart and eat it please). Cheers! Leto

I suspect that the more you say that you want certain kit picking features in CMx2, the less chance (of near zero already) are you going to get it, especially a point system, which there seems to be a certain bias against on economic and philosophical grounds. The horse is on the ground and you are all wearing out your boot toe here. As I've said before, we will just have to wait and see if the new system works. But if it does not allow for competitive play in QB's and a "game within a game" feature that is trying to pick a better kit than your opponent, then don't buy the game (which BFC assumes you will anyways, because they have the market cornered in this niche). Cheers! Leto

Wow, the old 'don't insult your own intelligence' line. Somehow I feel that this is an insult all unto itself. It's funny how when you analyze debates, you find a pattern in where negative connotations are attached to key issues that completely aggrandize their actually meaning. Some call it gamey and "cherry picking", where I use adjectives like fun and 'preference for play'. All arguments about reality aside: CMx1 kit picking in QB's is so popular that it is the chief attribute that allows the game to survive to this day (and dare I say 'thrive'). I would think that would have 'value' to a gaming company. I guess we will just have to wait and see, or go back to a 10 year old product. Cheers! Leto

Well, sounds like that is a love that can never be in the new CMN and relegated to the old CMx1 series. I like Redwolf's idea of using an open source community to do the points bits. That way, BFC doesn't have to worry about the poo fwinging. Just provide us with the ability to insert our own point systems into the game and we will take it from there. Mind you, for a short period of the CMN game, it shouldn't take long for even on person to set up the points system... and heck for what its worth, it can be the very same point system that is currently being used in CMAK, just transferred over! CMN without points would be like having an ice cream sunday with nuts, whipped cream, sprinkes and a big old fat testicle shaped cherry on top... without the ice cream. Cheers! Leto

Yep, I hear you... that's what I mean by 'fuzzy'. Cheers! Leto P.S. Have you 'hugged' your pack of cigarettes yet today? ; )

I'm glad that you didn't mock edit my above statement by removing the "l" from flag. What I meant here was that I would like to be able to know how heavily weighted that terrain objective is against any other objectives. Right now it is hard for me to deduce that, making my understanding of level of victory I may achieve very low. Cheers! Leto

Actually, that sums up my previous inarticulate views quite nicely. I'm fine with any system as long as it is clear, transparent and not contradictory. My concern is that the system must work for a QB game, yet have all the underlying principles it has now for scenario designers. It may be possible if terrain or exit are the only victory conditions (outside of pure casualty points). No one is saying that CMSF sucks, or the scoring system is a complete failure... its true that perhaps scenario designers need to be more clear on objectives, but not knowing how well you've done against securing these objectives is an immersion in realism that gamers like myself do not want. Cheers! Leto

I know that one of the main beefs about CMSF is the fuzzy logic around scoring and that one of the main arguments for this is that, hey, it is modern asymmetric warfare for the most part, and that it is much more complex than just destroying the enemy and holding ground (flags). So if this is the case, will there be a movement back to more solid logical ground and easier to gauge, dynamic victory probabilites, if we wish to use the above argument to frame WW 2 warfare as 'symmetric'? In other words, will grogs get to use probabilities and statistics to predict, generate, and define good outcomes? Cheers! Leto

I'm not sure if you don't have an appreciation for the thrill of 'kit picking' that was the centerpiece of CMx1 QB PBEM competitive matches. This is by far the most popular function of the game that allowed it to remain so well liked and played to this very day. The scenario system you propose just does not have the same appeal, and I think I can say that for most. In CMSF, I do agree, that you have very little choice or selection, but even the units available in CMSF now (with Marines and British forces) could be used in a kit picking system that would make it highly enjoyabe with statistically hundreds of permutations of kits, forces, strategies and gamestyles. What I think would be great with CMSF in a kit pick system similar to CMx1: mechanized and straight infantry battles where the tanks where left home and both Red and Blue forces could be on a more even keel. I've always wanted to try and simulate the movie "Black Hawk Down" in CMSF, with hundreds of 'skinnies' surrounding you in a city environment where all you have are a few BH squads and a few columns of highly penetratable Humvees and support units (perhaps someone has already made this scenario?). For me, kit picking and the deep sixing of this stupid 'fuzzy logic' scoring would make me very interested in CMSF again. (sure would be nice that if you lost a squad, you'd lose a certain amount of points, and if you lost a stryker, it would be a certain amount of points, and it would be nice to hold a REAL flag again. Cheers! Leto

...no it t'isn't!! It's a SIMULATION!!! ; ) Tomato, Tamato. We will just have to wait until we see the new system for QB's in CMx2 Normandy, and like all good groggy wargamers, sharpen our pitchforks in the dark and ensure that a large inventory of torches is on hand when we find that we are disappointed with the new system... and then, we will roll forth with fury upon our brows and brimstone upon our breath and storm the castle until we captured the hideous brain in a bottle that is Charles and force him to code to our desire!!! MWUAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!! : ) Cheers! Leto

Of course there are many people out there who would like this feature. But I am not sure that the market BFC is targeting is those who prefer to use PBEM and play the game like "chess" competitively against an opponent. It seems to me the majority of gamers now play the campaigns in solo mode. These are the people who will play the game for 2 to 6 months, finish the campaigns (like many of the storyline FPS games now on the market) and then move on to the next module when it comes out and plunk down their 40 bucks for that. If you guys think we are EVER getting anything like the QB kit picking days of yore with CMx1, don't hold your breath, as Steve has already said that is not in the works. What has been promised is "better", and as we all know, that term is subjective. I'd pay (cue Dr. Evil) "ONE ZILLION DOLLARS" for the old QB system. But that's just me. Cheers! Leto

I think that it is natural that beta testers take some modicum of ownership with the game, and are thus a bit more stiff about things. You have to admit, that beta testers are also very informative, helpful and even, believe it or not fun to have around. That being said, I concur with GSX and feel that no one should behave supercilliously and talk down to anyone else on these boards, just because they are a beta tester. What often happens I find, is that the pissing contexts between the haters and bet'ers form some crust on conversations and debates on these boards, which is both understandable, and regrettable. I guess we are all little kids inside, still playing wargames, and thus the inertia to act like children may often extend into other areas of how we act. Cheers! Leto

I find it sad that BFC has to actually justify its sales on these boards. I think this is superfluous and lowering yourselves to a level where you sound like you are responding to the criticism hoisted at you. Don't go all Palin on us and respond to the unfair liberal media at every little twist in the road. Offer us more tidbits on the upcoming CM Normandy, as much info on the CMSF series as you can, and perhaps smile a bit at the fact that you are still in business: the ultimate response to any critics who think the CM line of games suck. Cheers! Leto

I agree as well. But it does not absolve those who feel the game is fantastic from lowering the boom on people who also honestly want the game to be better and bring to the attention of all that some things are not quite right in the game. Kudos to Battlefront, definately. I also say we give a big hand of applause to all those out there that work tirelessly on the game (such as the beta-testers) and those who continually post bugs, post suggestions for improvement and discuss and debate aspects of the game that could possibly make it better. Let's hope that spirit here on the forums never is quashed, for it makes for a dynamic community, and that's a GOOD thing. Cheers! Leto

That's about as much fun as kissing your sister (for those of you in the deep south, this does not apply of course). : ) Seriously: ZZZZzzzzzzzz That's like saying let's play German Axis vs German Axis, or Russian vs Russian Allied, etc etc etc WW 2. I think we can just leave it that some people like the Syrian setting, and those with good taste, good looks, and good sense, do not. I think we can all agree on that, right? CMSF is interesting, much like Geordie said. I boot it up for half an hour here and there when I want to make Red Syrian Jelly (they make nice Jams and Compotes as well). I think at the end of the day, one is going to find that the tactical engine will be very good in PBEM... (as in CMx1, we all overcame the bugs, understood the limitations, and knew how the engine worked, so after a while, all these things that annoy you about CM 2 may be second nature and not as annoying) but the balance, setting and modern era warfare will really be a taste kind of thing. I expect grognards to hate it, and younger generation /military types to love it for its realism. Cheers! Leto

You assume that people don't realize how complex CMSF is and berate them for not loving it. Consumers are fickle, they don't like people telling them what they should or should not like. It may be the most complex and realistic simulation that ever was created, but if people don't think its fun, don't like the setting, or have any other ka zillion issues, they WON'T LIKE IT. And they will like it less if you tell them they are idiots for not liking it. To the point, some people would have rather HAD BFC bump up the CMx1 engine, include new graphics and stuff in some new units, and they would have been much more happy... to your point, even then, they would probably find something to whine about... and that leads me to the final point: perhaps respect the fact that some people just don't like certain aspects of it and leave it be!! BFC is not a religion that needs to send out missionaries across the world to ensure that everyone loves CMSF (killing all who oppose them in the process). It's a completely unvirtuous circle, and a nice ham sandwhich with mayo, tomato and lettuce would be so much better... perhaps an olive. Bread slightly toasted with some garlic butter. Therefore, let us eat. With our mouths full there is less bickering. ; ) Cheers! Leto

I don't know Adam, but I feel that there is this pervasive "us" vs "them" mentality here sometimes. I can only assume that with so much passion for the game invested in both beta testers, people who like the game, and people who want the game to be better, and those who just don't plain like the directon it has taken, there is going to be constant turbulence. It's unfortunate that people criticize a game, but for all intents and purposes, it sounds like Adam wanted to make the game better, and in his defense he often got pounced on by people defending the game. But there is a lot of criticism of this game, and BFC and its testers have had to put up with a lot of crap too. His bellicosity did not help his situation, but I think that he has become a victim of this "turbulence", although there are no excuses for his freaking out, I do agree. It's easy to be snide to people on message boards, lord knows I have done it myself, but i think that 99% of people here have a passion for the games that BFC puts out and that in general, everyone wants to make the game better. At the end of the day, it breaks down to those people who want the game to be a certain way, those people that want it a little different, and then those that have completely polar perspectives to the first set. And then there is BFC who makes the games "the way they want to make them" and they have the final say. If you like what BFC does, play the games, and add constructive criticism. If you don't like the games, then why are you here? For those of you who see someone posting that you disagree with for any reason, and all you can think of is "what a jerk", "boy I hate that guy", or DEATH TO XXX!! I KEEL HEEM!" then maybe you better screw off that melon of yours shake out the crap that has congealed between your ears, screw it back on and try to post with a bit more integrity, humility and most of all, less ascerbic rhetoric. We're all here because we love to game with the short amount of time that we have to play in our busy lives, and its always a tragedy when this crap erupts. BTW, you can vote for Leto as Miss Congeniality on an upcoming poll. I twirl batons in high heels while plotting CM moves for my talent show bit. Cheers! Leto