Dragon67

//Dragon67, you have to understand that you're personality type comes here quite frequently. You're as boring as you are distracting. You CLAIM you want to discuss the game, figure out where we stand on things, and then... I don't know what. But your behavior is the opposite. You want to bitch and complain, in a rude and haughty manner, then bitch and complain when you're ill manners are objected to. And so we wind up discussing the fact that you are going out of your way to be counter productive instead of actually having a positive discussion. But that's what you want... to be the center of attention.// Kiss my ass, stevie... you get your wish another poerson pointing out the defects of your game is outta here. the real issue here is that you cannot stand for a moment anyone saying anything negative about your game. I frankly don't give a crap about your livelyhood- that is not a valid answer to complaints about the ****ty things said about your game. If I was a boring person I would not be complaing about the crappy infantry AI and limited content of your game. If you want to complain or comment on someone's personality type- I suggest you start with your own boring self having to go line by line endlessly through posts to prove a point. You need to understand- if people of my personality type come in here to complain quit frequently- that means your game sucks more than you care to admit.

I run two computers also. I find that my Vista can be really stingy as far as doing a lot of things in modification and security. Sometimes I have to download onto XP and do modifications and then transfer files by quick cable to Vista. I find it very annoying that Microsoft is trying to micromanage my activities.

//Does the infantry wall behavior bug me? You betcha, in fact it really bugs me. On the other hand, I don't have the arrogance to assume that Battlefront is here to pander to my specific pet peeves and then get snide when it isn't delivered to me on a silver dish.// Battlefront is a business- they will take it and like it. The fact of the matter is that I have come to see that any questioning of this game regardless of how it is done is going down the same road. Basically you are going to be told what you are complaining about is realism and not a problem at all. Second, boo hoo you want it now or thirty years from now, third, belittling and chiding. Crap- more than two hundred posts on a simple little thing like adding a vehicle ? People figured it out yet ? Now you point out the problems of infantry AI in the game which is a really big problem, then what do you think is going to happen ?

I don't understand the ratio of wounded to killed. It would seem to me that if the game ends and you had a vehicle that strayed and was hit from every direction and isolated- that those crewmembers would be missing or dead. Yet at the end of the game no one is missing and there is less dead than there was in the crew ? Also, what about when an entire styker gets IED'd by a huge bomb. You would think that would cause the death ratio to go sky high, but it does not.

//Did you keep a copy Doom on your computer this whole time? it only took up 3 megs of space.// This is why I always buy retail and not download and make certain I keep passwords in three different places. If I do not use a program I have disk for over two weeks I remove it because eventually your system is affected. If you are like me you probably have a lot of storage eaten by media and every little bit helps. //BTW, I forgot to add that if we simulated (on purpose) either of the two Sherman tanker stories I just relayed there would most likely be a LOT of complaint threads.// I don't even understand the whole point of this^. I am talking about infantry behavior and placement. As the game is now it is the opposite as it should be. Because of the lack of ability to place the infantry into good firing positions and cover- I find that any move I make with infantry has (and mean absolutely has) to be covered by a vehicle popping smoke. Because there us too little control on where the infantry is going to go or behave. I don't think anyone thought I was speaking about a tank straying into a town where the town surrenders and the krauts cheer. You know, to your credit the vehicles behave and respond very well. But armour cannot operate without infantry support- so any realistic simulation has to be infantry based, not armour based.

//this is not a First Person Shooter so there have to be compromises or you will have to select every individual and give them their own paths// Not true. This is something I don't want to even see and not what I am advocating. In the JTF game you click the weighpoint and it provides a highlighted circle briefly that shows where the members will end up. So, if you see that members are going to be exposed- you simply adjust the weighpoint. The second option in that game would be to select the individuals as thet are approaching the weighpoints and deal with them individually. But in SF you could see ahead of time if the entire squad would even fit behind the cover you are maneuvering too- and if they won't, then you know to split into teams.

//What I can say is that the infantry behavior is very good as it is. Perfect? No, and it will never be. Can it be better than in v1.08? Yup, and that's what Thomm is implying. We can move forward on more than one thing at a time, so no worries there.// I will disagree with you here, the infantry behavior is not very good. Nothing is perfect but in CMBO it was something the player could deal with as the squads were meant to be represented by the figures. In this game however, you have individual soldiers and you really cannot tell exactly what is going to happen when you send them somewhere. They ussually end up doing something foolish like coming under fire because they formed a circle behind the wall instead of a firing line or lining up behind it.

//Evidence please? And if it is "a lot" of people, I'm assuming you can quote multiple examples.// I don't do cites by request especially for people who seem to have so much time on their hands they have nothing better to do then comment on other's posts by breaking it down line by line. //It's the most realistic of tactical land combat computer wargames, by far. Where even small details of where your troops are located or what direction your tank is facing make a difference in how a battle might go.// Buy this above quote is a good place to start. I would not call this game the most realistic by a stretch. It may have some edges... Also, back to JTF- the infantry teams you form you can select from different formations as well as lining teams against a wall and that game will show circle diagrams of where each team member will go when you set the weighpoint and a simple drag and click allows you to set facing- so obviously this game lacks in allowing the player intelligent choices in infantry tactics. Basically, when you click to send a team behind a wall for cover in SF you are lucky if you set them far back enouph that they won't jump the wall or not so far back that they are exposed. And forget trying to get one to use cover. I don't understand why if in this game you can get them to line in a ditch and run the length of the ditch most of the time- but forget about the same performance along a wall. Just saying.

//Though who am i to talk, i uninstalled CMSF months ago and don't plan on putting it back on my computer in the near future.// Could you please elaborate on why you believe the game is such a big waste of time ?

Hope so and sorry to get all hyper.

Yep, because insulting them is the way to get your message across. </font>

Okay, forget the M113 and I can't really believe that stupid thread went to over 200 posts anyway and has not gotten anywhere... All the real problems focus around infantry tactics anyway as the threads and posts the last few days all seem to point out. Slow crawling and ending up in unrealistic positions in enemy LOS are serious game hampering issues. My opinion is that this is all the result of CMBO line of using three figures to represent the entire squad has lead to no real work in the area of squad behavior/AI. This is all going to get worse and frustrating when the Marines 13 man squads arriving by truck with the new mod. Forget all the crud about vehicles and weapons and give us infantry that can survive a typical firefight by behaving realistically with survival and smart formation behavior. Give us quick and simple cover and facing options. Other games like JTF have implemented this.

you are not alone i would give moving suspension, swaying trees, and more of thses secondary things for "controlable" infantry, and other primary features and functions. after all it looks "good" when i see my man getting shot up in a beautifuly animated landscape, but thats a bout it. and we all know what they say about games that look good but dont play good </font>

Actually, I find troop placement problemental and difficult at best. i know I cannot be the only user here who gets frustrated when casualtys result while trying to place a squad into an attacking position and casualtys result because members of the squad unrealistically place themselves in the enemys LOS.

I can dream can't I ?