Pas De Charge

http://sill-www.army.mil/famag/2002/NOV_DEC_2002/NOV_DEC_2002_PAGES_8_11.pdf This only briefly mentions WW2 scenarios but it still has some interesting stuff to say on the topic.

What youre pointing out is sort of true and not true at the same time. You will NEVER lose a unit from your core pool, that just doesnt happen, everything gets carried over but what youre noticing is that in some missions the devs wanted to limit the units you have access to, presumably for gameplay or maybe historic reasons. So an example might be (not an actual one) towards the end of the german campaign Ive got access to about 10 tigers or something from past missions, but the next map is an infantry focused one so the devs dont want you rush tanks (he he) and to stop you they "remove" my tigers from the SELECTABLE unit pool, but those tigers havnt gone anywhere, i just can't use them for this mission. You may have allready known that I wasnt sure from your post but personally I dont mind this system at all otherwise I would be more or less taking the exact same set of units on every mission depending on the points allocation.

"I might mistake your identity and underestimate your authority on these matters, you are not one of the developers, are you? " Ahem, once again ""All penetration values are counted in one system. All penetration angles are 0 degrees when it’s counted." - from Soan

"All penetration values are counted in one system. All penetration angles are 0 degrees when it’s counted. " That seems to me to be the most important piece of information from the thread you linked. I have to say, I've read a few posts from you concerning the accuracy of the gun data in the game and I'm getting bored. You seem to be searching for the SMALLEST reason not to buy the game. 'I.ve checked the tables and it looks like the penetration of the 7.92 only goes as far as Ivans liver, this is SO ridiculous, it should at least hit his spine. Im appalled at the attention to detail yet am amazed at the amount of time I've spent researching this apperent lack of detail'

At the moment you can't place any waypoints but in either the partch or the addon (i forget which) they'll be adding the ability to issue SINGLE UNITS with waypoints, so you can't issue multiple waypoints to a group, still better than nothing though. As for the turns I wish i had an answer, this is something that annoys me quite a lot aswell!

Some damn russian soldier once killed TWO pzIIIs in about the space of 4 seconds using AT grenades, one hit, one kill!

I think it more or less has to tbe the way it is, aside from the difficulty of "have new troops spawning in areas hidden to the players limited field of view" (sorry but i really dont think thats as easy as you make it seem) theres the problem as destraex pointed out that you could kill the reinforcements, and have your own killed, before you could even control them....which would suck

The thing i don't get is that after listening to a lot of people saying cm was better than tow i dl'ed the demo for cm bb and god DAMN. Admittedly it was only a fairly superficial look at the game but the camera was DIRE, as far as i could tell i had to click on that cluster of arrows to manipulate the view.... unless i was too lazy/stupid to realise the was a better way of doing it. I have no idea why everyone likes the cm camera soo much.

errrm:S my officers are armed with all sorts :/ ive seen ncos with mp40s, thompsons etc. or am i missing something in the question?

"NO REFUND POLICY Battlefront.com does not offer refunds for products purchased. We are a small company and simply can not afford to offer this kind of service. Larger companies can absorb such costs because they turn right around and pass the costs on the rest of their customers." Sorry, you just can't thats taken from their order policy page btw if you want to check it out for yourself

I'm not sure (I havnt't touched the editor myself) but i'd give changing the stats of the guncrew and seeing the impact that makes. I can't remember exactly which start but i THINK its leadership, or intelligence affects "reaction times". That would be my guess anyway, if somethings only detected at very close range, the reaction time of the unit that spotted it will seem to be much greater than if it had been a longer range spot where the extra few seconds wouldnt have been important. Did that make sense? lol hopefully you get what i mean

I dont think its fair to say im defending battlefront, I've only ever bought one game from them and I happen to hate CM (it's just not my type of game). This was meant to be a rant about some of the weiredness in the forum but I've just made it much worse

Demos are just that demonstrations, not beta tests for "The Game That Would Please Everyone" :/ I agree fully on your observation of the tension on the forum but I don't think that your views on game development are at all accurate or relevant

"man, so was the game tested by people who hate CC, wich is the game on wich TOW is mainly inspired from??" Exactly my point, where in the design brief for this game was close combat listed as a major influence? Once again, imposing your expectations on this game. to the people who've had technical problems with the game, my thread really wasn't aimed at you, I took issue with the people who seem to have made it their own personal crusade to insult this game and its developers, when actually, their grievances are their own fault. For example, people who preordered EXPECTING it to be like game x, either for no good reason or simply because it was distributed by battlefront. I don't mind at all if people have technical difficulties with the game or to an extent gameplay issues (as long as its not "why isn't this like combat mission?) And to the person who accused me of working at battlefront... well, I dont know what to say real EDIT: and to Ghost1, have you SEEN the technical forum? Noone is denying you have problems running the game but what game doesnt? and it's SO easy to pretend everyone is having the same difficulty running the game as you are. If you actually WANT to resolve those technical problems, help the devs by posting in the support forums and do us all a favor. If you dont want to resolve the issues, how about going somewhere else? [ April 29, 2007, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: Pas De Charge ]

I think everyone can understand the dissapoint when a game fails to meet our expectations, but in this case, is it fair to blame the developers or even the game? Did they promise to deliver a new generation CC game? I think in fact matt might have said this game was distinctly UNLIKE CC or CM. Youre perfectly entitled to your opinions about the game but don't you think blaming the developers or the game for not meeting your expectations, in this case, is a little unfair? And frankly, this is THE MOST realistic rts I've played, even without things like mortars, smoke and enterable buildings.

After buying and playing the game (bought on the strength of the demo),I decided to come to the forums and see what other people thought.. well what can i say? Wow. On the one hand we have people who preordered the game on the basis that it's from the same WEBSITE (not, i understand, the same developer) as the combat mission games. These people then after playing the game, come to this forum and make various compaints about it and then call anyone who defends it a fanboy (irony anyone?). Am I the only one who thinks thats a little odd? Lets ignore for a second the fact that a significant portion of the complaints made are more or less "it isn't enough like CM" and just focus on the fact that "you" bought a game apperently, JUST because it was distributed by the company who made a game you liked (im hesitant to use the word "like" as it doesn't seem strong enough, love? idolise?). If there was ever a bad reason for buying a game, that has to come fairly near the top of the list. I've even read of one person who said if they'd known more about the editor, they wouldn't have preordered... Personally, if i'm planning on buying a game MAINLY to use it's editor (which is not something I can see a single good reason for doing), I just might wait for the release to see how good it is. After all, what miracles of map-editory are you planning on achieving the second the game is released? Can they really not wait? Anyway, as I was saying on the one hand we have what im politely calling "Battlefront fans" (I know its not everyone, or even a significant majority, but it's just enough people to annoy me), who bought the game because it was from battlefront, then for reason/s x dont like the game and for some bizzare reason think they have a valid grievance against the game itself. This is where it really gets weired, the support of battlefront that led you to buy the game in the first place is suddenly dropped and forgotten about as you proceed to constantly insult and criticize both theatre of war, its developers and the people who've soo far played and enjoyed it. I read one person who now said they would not preorder the next combat mission game because of some sort of perceived deception on behalf of battlefront over theatre of war. Fickle much? I don't really know what to say about this to be frank but hopefully you can see my point. I've never before seen such a bizarre situation over the release of a game (not saying there hasn't been one). In my opinion, even though you did spend real-life, persumably hard-earned money on it, the fact you had such poor reasons for buying the game in the first place just make me wish battlefront had charged twice as much for it. Then maybe next time you won't be quiet so silly. I'm sorry my first post is soo negative and agressive but i really did feel the need to express my honest incredulity at some of the posts and threads on this bored. P.S. I'm now a Theatre of War F4nboi and I'm proud of it.