Jump to content

Frankster65

Members
  • Posts

    857
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Frankster65

  1. Depends on tons of things, depends on what information BF can dig out

    Yeah I agree. One of the things BF gets criticized about with resepct to CMSF is the guesswork they had to do on classified weapon systems and how to simulate that in the game. I like what they have done, I think they've done a superb job in making that guess and making the game work as well as keep it fun.

    With respect to the WW2 series, CMBN and beyond, they don't have to guess, the data is there.

    It is going to be the same problem with CMSFx2 they had with CMSFx1.

  2. What I liked about the HUGE maps in CM1 is that one had operational-level choices and much more opportunity for maneuver combat.

    I most enjoyed playing with regimental or even larger formations in CM1 Operations where one could maintain reserves etc.

    I hope that CM2 maps will get to be larger for that reason.

    Wow! You played with regimental size units in CMx1? I did not think that was possible. I have always played (at most) battalion vs. battalion engagements. Anything bigger I considered too much to handle. I play CMSF battalion vs battalion engagements and love it. Anything more than that and frame rates (depending on map type) begin to show trouble.

  3. I am stoked about CMSF2, as I play the crap out of CMSF now waiting till I can get Normandy. The temperate region will be a nice change of pace, but people wanting larger maps will realize a ton of that size will be nerfed by all the terrain (trees, hedges, etc.) in a temperate region. Sure, there will be large expanses of land, but a good many battles will be fought at infantry AT range, or closer, like in CMBN.

    In some ways I understand the argument by some for larger maps but to be frank about it, I think the size of maps in CMSF are perfect. There are some big maps out there with some great scenarios, look at for example George MC's scenarios, quite big maps with room to maneuver yet contours give excellent hiding and reverse slope situations. I've always viewed the start of a scenario in CMSF as the beginning phase following operational maneuver. Operational maneuver took place before scenario starts, now tactical is played out on the scenario.

  4. You guys who call for bigger maps...I agree with you to a degree but I got to ask...have you guys ever played George MC scenarios? He has some seriously good scenarios with some rather large maps. Maps which you actually can do some serious maneuvering.

  5. I love the simplicity yet depth of the HUD interface. When you click on your unit, you look at a very well laid out panel of information. In an instant, you can tell what your squad/vehicle is made up of (weapons, armor, damage), how much ammo left, morale, experience, battle status. Great lay out, and pretty to look at. Superb form and function.

  6. There are a tremendous group of talented and creative people in this hobby. I've enjoyed so many of George' scenarios and maps in CMSF. He ranks right up there in the top three. I'm very much looking forward playing his CMBN scenarios.

    @George

    I would love to hear your process in creating these wonderful maps. I'm currently working on a map in CMSF and would welcome any advice, any thoughts on how to go about making them so realistic.

  7. You have an interesting perspective on timescales.

    Hope you enjoy your mortgage. :)

    LOL. Yes, you are correct. I only sigh because I love this game and want to play with NATO but no panzerfaust makes me nervous for my pixeltroopen.

    And by the way, I did take out a very big mortgage this early spring.;)

  8. Now, one question that comes to mind, if we extrapolate; in the next big release will we be seeing interiors of the pixeltruppen as well? Where we might, for instance, spot and compare differences in the respective operative methods of American and German surgeons in, say, appendix operations :)

    M.

    LOL...well said sir.:) It really is a work of art. The more I look into this game, the more my respect for Battlefront grows...and it already was large to begin with.:)

    I had fun experimenting with the game last night. I set up a quick battle, large map. Put a battalion of infantry on map and had them march in battle formation over the fields. I was watching the movement, the animations of the troops as they are moving to their battle positions. Looking at them from different angles, different heights and distances, I swore they were real troops moving up to the line. Beautiful stuff!:D

  9. One of the disadvantages of WEGO and of CM's excellent realism is that when units do something weird it really sticks out. Sometimes you can pretend to yourself that there is a sound reason but sometimes... This thread is for those other moments.

    * My HMG came under arty fire and the gunner was killed. The other people in the squad continued to fire at the enemy... with their rifles. Well done lads.

    * A veteran scout squad told to hide in the trees seems to have panicked under arty fire and decided to open up on the overwhelming American forces c 100m away and in cover.

    Any other favourite AI failures?

    So in your world troops always make the right decision? There is no panicking, no mistakes made by soldiers in the heat of battle? Everything is to run as if in a perfect formula? LOL...yeah that is how it works in real life too.;)

×
×
  • Create New...