hammelman

I agree completely with Rick, a total rational thought process that makes sense. I also like your photography Rick, cute birds.

MOO2 is of course a war game - as war is the optimum end. I wasnt to fond of MOO2 and MOO3 was laughable. Sid Meier is a great game designer though. I think the game with the most impact for me would have been Gary Grigby's War In The Pacific, and as a very close second Hearts of Iron 2.

You guys are too much, i read the board daily just to see you people get into it. Its like when i tried playing table top games and all the dorks wouldn't be able to finish any games cause they got so wrapped up in the rules. After the 5th or 6th time i said forget this, moving on. Seriously kids, its a v-i-d-e-o g-a-m-e. If time truly equals money than all the time you spend on this board being pissed is actually costing you more than the original game did. Why not just close your eyes, put on some relaxing music, play some CMx1, and calmly wait for the inevitable patch? There that wasn't so hard was it.

I actually agree 100% with you on issues pertaining to the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. You and I have the luxury of having our armchairs, our opinion although valid in certain instances does not really come into play - because we are not Syrian. We are more than likely way more educated on the circumstances of the any war than the common dude on the ground, but our emotion is not tuned to it in a realistic way. So i guess i find it hard to contemplate how a Syrian would feel expect in a very few instances - as my previous post indicated.

I bet if we did a statistical analysis of any culture it would have people who were either red or blue, for or against. Theres only really 2 answers (in my mind) to the original question, A: i hate that the Americans are the aggressors, and we Syrians are portrayed as the bad guy, or B: I think its great the Americans are liberating Syria from Dear Leader. No matter what, people are going to end up in one of the 2 categories, and i bet over time equally people will distribute among them. So i guess why i am irked by the original topic is its highly predictable what the answers will be, answers we've heard time and again in life. Therefore GSX is asking a question that we already know the answer to.

I played German in CM1 cause they were just damn better. I still think this thread is pointless and this: pretty much sums it up.

my dad (Hammel) wrote "Duel for the Golan" so i vote for that! My uncle also fought in the war with Sharon.

There are many weird graphical things in CMSF, but with all the negative that has been associated with this game, i would have to say i am thoroughly impressed with the graphics. The graphics hold true to the original CM games, and are so much more awesome. I think its like when you hear a guitar and you know what band it is not because of the song, but because that particular guitar has this genuine sound - i see that same evolution in the graphics of CMSF. I like the familiar feel of the grass, even though it isn't the best grass.

I agree, a rather pointless question. Thats like saying "Are there any Israelis that play this game? How do you feel about the Syrians being the bad guy." Pointless.

We crave victory in whatever form it takes. Regarding the person who called IED people cowards, i personally think it takes the same bravery to sit there and know that your actions will lead to certain death (yours or theirs), and take the lives of others with you. Everyone is just doing their job. Regarding the The Warrior who's uncle was a pilot - those men are terribly brave because they too faced certain death, at some points during the war they faced even higher odds than their friends on the ground. I think Nemesis Lead was trying to say that its morally the same thing to press the button to drop the bomb as it is to press the button to detonate in the street. I happen to agree with Nemesis Lead.

I saw that on Digg the other day, quite hilarious. On a related note, this is a game, we all feel a certain way about it as a result of our feelings about past BFC games. Remember people its a game, not real life, but just like real life its not fair and it nots what YOU invisioned. I very rarely play this game anymore, because i just dont find it interesting. It's a pattern in the gaming industry, but remember BFC is a business first and they makes games for gamers second. Thats just the way it is. Vote with your feet.

nd.

What children hath god wrought on us. Aim gun at wall, wall goes boom, aim gun at next wall section, wall goes boom. American troops most always have plenty of ammo to make it through a battle without running out, this is not rocket science.

can't say i've had that problem. hmmm.

Steve, that is quite fair and i appreciate you giving a heads up to the community on that. I guess i feel these games are very much a pillar of my war gaming experience, and i think everyone should get to play them to give them an idea of the overall strategy of war - thereby making their CM experience ever more in depth. I love this stuff.

And for all the people who want to play either of these fine games (hopefully BFC doesnt cancel my access to board for this) you can download them provided for free by Matrix Games at: War In The Pacific Download Page and War In Russia Download Page

I personally preferred War In The Pacific to WIR because WIP was much more dynmaic with the movement. You could really have unexpected things happen, where WIR was very much in your face, and the field changed little. WIP was flawed however, as American if you held Wake Is. the Japanese would kill all of their units trying to take it - until the game ended in their defeat.

i dont feel bad for paying $45 for the download, and you shouldnt feel bad about paying full price whatsoever - thats just how it goes. I agree that the game is not half of what i expected, but that doesnt have anything to do with the price. There are no take-backs in life. If you think you got ripped off, then you are a sorry sorry person. It's like a bunch of spoiled little brats took over the forum and said "But Mommy, its not fair" Boo-hoo children.

i havent had a problem with Meeting Engagement, just Probe and attack.

I've noticed this too. It can get your squad wiped out under the "right" conditions. It is frustrating.

if you look at the picture where the number 2 is (target building), you can barely make out that the wall of the building facing the player is breached on the first floor. Once it has been breached i order troops into the building (route 1). The problem is they dont go to route 1, they go to route 2 automatically, no matter if i walk them right up to the wall, or start them from a different building. I am perplexed.

Hello, So in 1.2 I would bum rush from the rear of a building and my troops would actually go in at the correct angle. In 1.3 this is not the case. In the picture, Number 1 represents where i want them to go, and Number 2 represents the path that they actually take. I've blown the back wall of the building, and told my troops to enter the building, but they keep on going around to the other side of the building. What am i missing here?